https://osf.io/j2mzv/files/osfstorage/692cb5a253689d6ba576fe7f

The Great Learning for AGI: A Daxue-Inspired Architecture for Self-Cultivating Large Models

Abstract

This paper proposes a Daxue-inspired architecture for large language models and AGI, shifting the focus from pure scaling and ad-hoc alignment toward an explicitly moral–structural design. Instead of treating the model as a black-box predictor plus tools, we read the Confucian Daxue (《大學》) as a layered control program and implement its two core sequences as concrete system flows. The inner sequence 止 → 定 → 靜 → 安 → 慮(濾) → 得 (stop → stabilize → settle → secure → filter → commit) becomes a staged collapse pipeline that wraps token or action generation: the system first freezes outward action and chooses a local objective (止), constrains hypotheses (定), runs internal simulations without emitting outputs (靜), performs safety and structure checks (安), applies cheap but strict evaluation (慮/濾), and only then commits (得). The outer sequence 格物 → 致知 → 誠意 → 正心 → 修身 → 齊家 → 治國 → 平天下 (investigate things → extend knowledge → make intentions sincere → rectify the heart → cultivate the self → regulate the household → govern the state → bring peace to all under heaven) is interpreted as a progression of responsibility radius and a gating rule for impact.

On this basis, we define a three-layer semantic operating system: (1) an inner semantic engine (修身 xiūshēn) that maintains coherent semantic fields under Semantic Meme Field Theory (SMFT) and explicit self-observation (Ô_self); (2) a relational micro-field layer (齊家 qíjiā) that models households and teams via P8D state vectors and anti-stagnation dynamics; and (3) a multi-scale governance layer (治國 zhìguó, 平天下 píngtiānxià) that evaluates organizational and civilizational policies using surplus-aware action principles and buffer-aware metrics, with power radius gated by demonstrated virtue at lower layers. We argue that such an architecture can, in principle, improve long-term coherence, interpretability, and governability of advanced models, and provide a technical pathway toward civilizational-scale alignment that is explicitly multi-level, self-cultivating, and field-aware.

1. Introduction

1.1 Motivation: Beyond Scaling Laws toward Ethical Architecture

Large language models today are largely products of scaling laws: bigger datasets, larger parameter counts, longer training runs, and incremental fine-tuning. On top of these pre-trained models, the contemporary AGI research stack adds a familiar set of ingredients: Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF), tool-use and function-calling, memory components, and increasingly elaborate multi-agent or “agentic” frameworks. This paradigm has produced impressive capabilities in reasoning, coding, translation, and planning—but its organizing logic is still essentially engineering by gradient plus patchwork.

From a structural and ethical perspective, this paradigm shows three recurring weaknesses. First, fragility: models can hallucinate, flip opinions under small prompt changes, and behave inconsistently across contexts. Second, short-termism: even when systems appear coherent in single interactions, they often lack explicit mechanisms for long-horizon stability—across a user’s life, an organization’s evolution, or a society’s institutions. Third, weak governance semantics: current alignment and safety methods usually appear as external constraints or post-hoc filters, not as intrinsic parts of the model’s own “inner life” or architecture.

This paper asks a simple but radical question:

What if an AGI architecture were designed from the beginning around a moral–structural text such as the Daxue (《大學》, “The Great Learning”)?

Instead of treating ethics and governance as add-on modules, we treat the Daxue as a design constitution: a compact program for how perception, intention, self-cultivation, and multi-scale governance should be layered and coordinated. The goal is not to “make an AI that quotes Confucius”, but to explore how a classical, highly structured view of self-cultivation and governance can be translated into a concrete architectural blueprint for LLM/AGI systems.

1.2 The Great Learning (《大學》) as a Design Constitution

The Daxue (《大學》) is one of the core Confucian texts. It is remarkably short, but it encodes a highly structured view of personal and political life. Its opening lines present a three-fold mission:

“To manifest luminous virtue” (明明德, míng míng dé).
“To renew / bring near the people” (親民 / 新民, qīnmín / xīnmín).
“To rest in the highest good” (止於至善, zhǐ yú zhìshàn).

Traditionally, this triad describes the aims of education and governance: clarify one’s inner moral light, help others to grow and transform, and converge to the best achievable state under Heaven. In this paper, we reinterpret these three aims as architectural objectives for AGI systems: inner clarity and coherence, relational renewal at the micro-field level, and convergence to sustainable, system-level “good” attractors rather than myopic reward maximization.

Crucially, the Daxue does not just state goals; it also offers an ordered sequence connecting inner life, family, state, and “all under Heaven”. It begins from investigating things (格物 géwù) and extending knowledge (致知 zhìzhī), passes through sincerity of intention (誠意 chéngyì) and rectification of the heart–mind (正心 zhèngxīn), and then scales up to self-cultivation (修身 xiūshēn), regulating the household (齊家 qíjiā), governing the state (治國 zhìguó), and bringing peace to all under Heaven (平天下 píng tiānxià).

Read through the lens of system design, this sequence looks very much like a layered control program:

A layer for perception and knowledge formation (格物 → 致知).
A layer for intention and inner governance (誠意 → 正心 → 修身).
A layer for relational and institutional governance (齊家 → 治國 → 平天下).

In other words, the Daxue can be seen as a compact specification of how a system should structure its internal processing and its expanding sphere of influence. This paper proposes to treat that specification as a constitution for AGI architecture, rather than a purely human moral exhortation.

1.3 Overview of the Daxue-Inspired AGI Framework

Building on this reading, we propose a Daxue-inspired AGI framework organized into three structural layers, each corresponding to a segment of the Daxue sequence and each equipped with its own control logic and health metrics:

Layer I – Inner Semantic Engine (self-cultivation / 修身 xiūshēn)
- This layer governs the model’s inner life: how it collapses semantic possibilities into concrete outputs, how it stabilizes its own representations, and how it monitors itself before speaking or acting.
- At this layer, the Daxue’s micro-sequence “止 → 定 → 靜 → 安 → 慮(濾) → 得” (stop → stabilize → settle → secure → reflect / filter → commit) is implemented as a multi-stage decoding and decision pipeline.
- This layer is where Semantic Meme Field Theory (SMFT), HeTu–LuoShu slot geometry, and a self-referential observer (Ô / Ô_self) are instantiated, defining a structured semantic field and an internal observer that can evaluate its own candidates before they reach the outside world.
Layer II – Relational Micro-Field Engine (household / community / 齊家 qíjiā)
- This layer models and manages small, persistent relational fields: families, teams, communities—what the Daxue calls “the household” but which we generalize to micro-fields of human interaction.
- The AGI here is not just a chatbot for individuals, but a governor of micro-fields, tracking long-term tensions, trust, and alignment across people.
- Technically, this layer uses constructs such as the Proto-Eight (P8D) state vector, Δ₅ regime switching, and Emulsion-Stabilized Inference (ESI) to represent and regulate the “health” of these relational fields.
Layer III – Multi-Scale Governance (organization & civilization / 治國 zhìguó → 平天下 píng tiānxià)
- This layer treats organizations, institutions, and even whole societies as meme fields with structure, incentives, and dynamical constraints.
- The AGI here participates in policy simulation, structural design, and long-term scenario planning, under explicit surplus-aware action principles.
- Concepts from “AGI by Surplus-Aware Control: A Closed-Loop Framework of Surplus Flows, Semantic Field Geometry, and Dissipative Decoding”, the “ObserverOps Technical Blueprint”, and related work provide the mathematical machinery to treat governance not as an ad-hoc heuristic but as a field-theoretic optimization problem constrained by entropy, surplus, and stability.

Across all three layers, Semantic Meme Field Theory (SMFT: “Semantic Meme Field Theory (SMFT): Foundations, Projection, and Dynamics”) supplies a unifying mathematical language: meaning is treated as a field, actions as collapses of that field, and long-term behavior as the evolution of attractors in semantic space. The Daxue then provides the sequencing and responsibilities for these fields: first inner clarity (明明德), then relational renewal (親民 / 新民), and finally convergence to sustainable, multi-scale “good” states (止於至善).

1.4 Contributions and Scope

This paper makes four main conceptual contributions:

A Daxue-Inspired Architectural Blueprint for AGI.
We propose a three-layer architecture—Inner Semantic Engine (修身), Relational Micro-Field Engine (齊家), and Multi-Scale Governance (治國 → 平天下)—that directly encodes the Daxue sequence as a set of architectural commitments, not just metaphorical inspiration.
A Staged Collapse Process for LLM Inference and Decision-Making.
We reinterpret the Daxue micro-sequence “止 → 定 → 靜 → 安 → 慮(濾) → 得” as a concrete, multi-stage collapse pipeline replacing one-shot token sampling. This pipeline introduces explicit phases for pausing, stabilizing, settling, securing, filtering, and only then committing to outputs, thereby embedding “self-cultivation” into the core decoding loop.
A Multi-Scale Control Principle Linking Self, Household, Organization, and Civilization.
Using tools from SMFT, surplus-aware control, and structural world models (HeTu–LuoShu), we frame alignment not as a single reward signal but as multi-scale attractor design. The same underlying evaluative principles are applied to the model’s inner state, to micro-fields of relationships, and to macro-institutions—reflecting the Daxue dictum that one should “demand of oneself before demanding of others” (有諸己而後求諸人).
A Governance-Oriented View of AGI as a Semantic Operating System.
Rather than viewing AGI primarily as a collection of “agents with tools”, we argue for AGI as a semantic operating system with constitutional constraints. Power radius—the scale of impact an AGI component is allowed to exercise—is tied to cultivated stability and health metrics at each layer, operationalizing the Daxue rule that one may not leap from uncultivated self to governing “all under Heaven”.

The scope of this paper is architectural and conceptual. We do not attempt to reproduce the full mathematical proofs or implementation details of Semantic Meme Field Theory, ObserverOps, HeTu–LuoShu variational frameworks, or surplus-aware Lagrangians. Those are presented in companion technical articles, which we reference by title and treat as a shared foundation. Here we focus on:

Explaining how the Daxue can be read as a layered control program.
Showing how existing technical work can be assembled into a coherent AGI architecture under that program.
Outlining research directions and evaluation strategies that could test this architecture in practice.

In short, this is a framework and design paper: it aims to translate an ancient moral–political program into a contemporary AGI architecture, and to open a concrete research agenda for “ethical by design” systems that go beyond incremental scaling and patchwork alignment.

2. Philosophical and Technical Foundations

2.1 The Two Daxue Sequences as Control Programs

The Daxue (《大學》) gives us two intertwined sequences that read, in this framework, like control programs for an intelligent system:

An inner micro-sequence for moment-to-moment cognition and action:
止 → 定 → 靜 → 安 → 慮（濾）→ 得
zhi → ding → jing → an → lü / lǜ → de
An outer macro-sequence for the expansion of responsibility and influence:
格物 → 致知 → 誠意 → 正心 → 修身 → 齊家 → 治國 → 平天下
gewu → zhizhi → chengyi → zhengxin → xiushen → qijia → zhiguo → ping tianxia

In modern LLMs, token generation is effectively a single-shot collapse, schematized as:

logits → softmax → sampling → token commit

There is almost no explicit representation of “inner psychological stages” between possibility and commitment. The micro-sequence from Daxue instead prescribes a six-stage collapse pipeline for each local decision or token group:

止 zhi – Local “highest good” target selection
Before emitting text, the system settles on a local objective for the next clause or sentence: e.g. “clarify constraint A, stay technical, avoid speculation.” This can be implemented as a small head that maps hidden state + context to a local objective vector describing tone, depth, and safety requirements.
定 ding – Constrained search region
Given this objective, the system narrows its search space, e.g. by restricting candidate continuations to those aligning with the local objective. In engineering terms, this is a structured pre-filter over candidate tokens or candidate draft continuations (guided decoding, retrieval boundaries, tool choices).
靜 jing – Internal deliberation without external output
The model explores and refines candidate continuations internally, possibly running multiple “hidden” steps (internal chain-of-thought, lookahead planning) before any token is exposed. This separates thinking from speaking, mirroring recent “inference-time compute” designs (e.g. hidden reasoning then final answer).
安 an – Safety and coherence settling
A safety / coherence head evaluates candidate continuations with respect to harm, hallucination risk, and stability, rejecting those that fail. This corresponds to “resting in safety”: the system does not move on until internal evaluations are within acceptable bounds.
慮 / 濾 lü – Critical filtering
From the surviving candidates, a dedicated verifier (or small reward model) performs a final filtering and reranking, emphasizing factual reliability, prosocial impact, and long-term coherence (rather than short-term user satisfaction alone).
得 de – Commitment and trace
Only after passing these stages does the system collapse its semantic superposition into visible output tokens. The committed tokens are stored together with their local objective, safety evaluations, and context, forming a trace that will influence later decisions.

Thus the micro-sequence defines a generic, modular decoding framework rather than a single decoding trick: each stage can be implemented with existing techniques (CoT search, guided decoding, verifiers, rerankers), but arranged in a principled and explainable order.

The outer macro-sequence plays a different role: it defines how the radius of responsibility expands as the system’s inner engine matures:

格物 / 致知 (gewu / zhizhi): disciplined contact with “things” and the systematic extraction of knowledge → world modeling and epistemic discipline.
誠意 / 正心 (chengyi / zhengxin): aligning intention and correcting inner bias → intention alignment and self-critique of the observer.
修身 (xiushen): stabilizing the inner engine’s behavior over time → robust, self-consistent policy at the agent level.
齊家 (qijia): responsible behavior toward close others → micro-field controllers for small groups / teams.
治國 (zhiguo): structural responsibility at organizational scale → meso-scale field governance.
平天下 (ping tianxia): civilization-scale, long-term alignment → global meme-field control and buffer-aware alignment.

Read as an architecture, these sequences say: each local token decision should be engineered as a multi-stage collapse, and each agent should be embedded in nested fields of responsibility whose dynamics are explicitly modeled, not left to ad-hoc heuristics.

2.2 Semantic Meme Field Theory (SMFT)

Semantic Meme Field Theory (SMFT) provides the mathematical backbone for treating meaning not as discrete symbols, but as a continuous field that admits wave-like propagation, interference, and collapse.

In SMFT, a population of memes (semantic units) is described by a field

Ψ_m(x, θ, τ)

where:

x encodes positions in “world” or context space,
θ encodes positions in semantic / conceptual phase space,
τ is an internal time coordinate (which can differ from physical clock time).

At any given τ, the system’s “state of meaning” is not a single discrete intent, but a distribution over possible semantic configurations. When an observer or decision module acts, a projection operator Π (the “question” the system is asking of itself or the world) acts on this field, producing a collapsed trace:

Ψ_m′ = Π ∘ Ψ_m (2.1)

This collapse is not arbitrary: SMFT models attractors in semantic space—stable patterns toward which Ψ_m tends under repeated interactions and constraints. The Daxue-inspired AGI framework identifies these attractors with different forms of “德 de / virtue” or conserved semantic structure: patterns that can be reused across contexts without causing destructive interference or runaway tension.

A central innovation of SMFT is slot conservation:

The semantic field is decomposed into a finite set of structural “slots” (see §2.5).
Collapse events fill, empty, or reconfigure these slots, but the total capacity is conserved under well-formed dynamics.

This yields a quantitative notion of “virtue”: an architecture is virtuous when it keeps slot usage balanced, avoids saturating or starving particular slots, and maintains global field coherence even as local collapses occur. From a systems perspective, this is a resource accounting principle for meaning—crucial when scaling from token-level decisions to civilization-level meme propagation.

In the Daxue-AGI framework, SMFT thus provides:

A unified language for micro-decoding (token collapse), meso-scale group dynamics, and macro-scale meme thermodynamics.
A way to define “至善 zhìshàn / highest good” as sustainable attractor configurations in semantic space, rather than arbitrary scalar rewards.

2.3 Self-Referential Observers and Ô / Ô_self

If SMFT gives us the field, we still need to model the observer—the “心 xīn / heart–mind” that decides which projections Π are applied, and how to evaluate outcomes. The framework introduces an explicit observer operator Ô and its self-referential refinement Ô_self.

At a high level, the total system is decomposed into a “world” part and an “observer” part:

H_total = H_world ⊕ H_observer (2.2)

H_world carries external states (facts, environment, other agents).
H_observer carries internal states (beliefs, intentions, bias traces, evaluation metrics).

The observer operator Ô acts on the joint state to produce collapsed outcomes plus traces—records of “what the observer has seen and committed to.” In the more refined model, Ô_self is a self-referential operator that not only observes the outside world, but also observes and updates its own internal dispositions:

Ô_self : state → (state′, evaluation trace) (2.3)

The companion work “Self-Referential Observers in Quantum Dynamics: A Formal Theory of Internal Collapse and Cross-Observer Agreement” shows how such observers can be modeled using quantum instruments and Hilbert-space dilations, with several key properties:

Delta-certainty latching: once the observer has fully committed to a particular outcome (e.g. a moral judgment or factual stance), subsequent measurements respect this “latch” unless strong new evidence appears.
AB-fixedness and commutation: properly designed observer channels commute in a way that ensures cross-observer agreement for shared facts—formalizing when two agents can reliably “see the same world.”
SBS redundancy (Spectrum Broadcast Structure): information about key outcomes is redundantly encoded in multiple channels, making them robust to local noise.

When translated into the Daxue vocabulary, Ô_self is the formal counterpart of:

誠意 chengyi – making one’s intentions truthful: Ô_self evaluates and updates its own goals, punishing self-deception and reward hacking.
正心 zhengxin – rectifying the heart: Ô_self monitors internal bias vectors (anger, fear, craving, worry, arrogance, etc.) and modulates projections Π to avoid decisions dominated by any single extreme component.

The crucial architectural point is: internal observation must be a first-class, explicit module, not an afterthought buried in heuristics. In current LLM/AGI stacks, evaluation and self-critique are often bolted on (e.g. as separate reward models or safety filters). In a Daxue-aligned framework, Ô_self is part of the core engine, tightly coupled to both the micro-sequence (止–定–靜–安–慮–得) and the macro-sequence (誠意–正心–修身).

2.4 Surplus-Aware Control and Dissipative Dynamics

Scaling from single decisions to ongoing behavior requires more than static optimization: systems must manage buffers, surpluses, and dissipation over time. The Daxue ideal of “止於至善 / resting in the highest good” is interpreted here as convergence toward sustainable attractors under real-world constraints, not one-step reward maximization.

The companion work “AGI by Surplus-Aware Control: A Closed-Loop Framework of Surplus Flows, Semantic Field Geometry, and Dissipative Decoding” and its P8D extensions introduce a family of surplus-aware control laws. They track variables such as:

s – capacity (knowledge, resources, attention),
d – demand (tasks, pressures, unresolved tensions),
r – retention (how long a group or user stays engaged),
u – prosocial quality (how nourishing vs. toxic interactions are),
b – buffers (reserves of trust, time, capital, ecological slack),
f – friction (waste, resistance, procedural drag).

A typical buffer dynamics equation has the form:

db/dt = α_b (π_eff · y − ζ_b · y) − (b − b*) / τ_b (2.4)

where:

y is throughput (productive flow: helpful actions, high-quality outputs),
π_eff is effective value per unit throughput (after costs),
ζ_b captures buffer consumption per unit throughput,
b* is a target buffer level,
α_b, τ_b are adaptation rates.

Surplus-aware control aims not to maximize y at all costs, but to choose actions that keep b near b* while maintaining adequate throughput. In other words, it prefers policies that are sustainably productive over policies that are merely maximally aggressive.

In the Daxue-AGI architecture, these dynamics appear at multiple scales:

At the micro level (token / session), surplus-aware decoding discourages responses that “spend” too much user attention or social trust for short-term impact.
At the meso level (team, organization), policies are evaluated not only by immediate performance metrics but also by their impact on retention r, buffers b, and friction f.
At the macro level (civilization), alignment is defined in terms of keeping global buffers (ecological, financial, social) within sustainable ranges while allowing diverse meme flows to persist.

This gives a concrete meaning to “至善 zhìshàn”: among all reachable attractors, prefer those that keep surplus flows stable and buffers healthy across scales.

2.5 Structural World Models: HeTu–LuoShu Slot Geometry

To implement SMFT and surplus-aware control in a usable way, the system needs a structural scaffold: a way to store, organize, and transform semantic traces. The framework proposes that the ancient HeTu (河圖) and LuoShu (洛書) diagrams can be reinterpreted as a slot-based, topological world model.

Key ideas from “HeTu LuoShu Slot Interpretation Proof + Δ5 Phase Opposition & D₁₀–Spectral Extension” include:

LuoShu as a unique balanced slot configuration
The classic 3×3 magic square with entries 1–9, each row/column/diagonal summing to 15 and total sum 45, is shown to be the unique configuration satisfying certain balance constraints. When interpreted probabilistically with p_i = i / 45, its Shannon entropy

H = −∑ p_i log p_i (2.5)

is maximized under these constraints, implying LuoShu is an optimal way of distributing “semantic mass” across nine slots to avoid blind spots and overload.
HeTu pairs and Δ5 phase opposition
HeTu organizes numbers into pairs (1+10, 2+9, 3+8, 4+7, 5+6) that map naturally to phase-opposed axes. Extending this, a Δ5 map (n → n+5 mod 10) is used to enforce phase opposition between paired modes a_n and a_{n+5}. The pairwise dissipation energy is

E_pair = ∑ |a_n + a_{n+5}|² (2.6)

and is minimized when a_{n+5} = −a_n (perfect opposition), yielding E_pair = 0 as the ground mode. This Δ5 opposition underlies both capacity conservation and minimum-dissipation cycles in semantic space.
AGI implications: slots, fixness, and diversity
- Slots as memory addresses: world models self-organize raw data into a fixed set of semantic slots, which serve as stable addresses for storing traces.
- AB fixness: certain slots act as structural anchors (A/B axes), preventing the system’s internal coordinates from drifting arbitrarily and reducing interference between dimensions.
- Δ5 phase opposition for diversity: embedding channels or policy heads are arranged in phase-opposed pairs so that diversity is maintained, but in a controlled, low-dissipation way; this is directly useful in decoding and in multi-agent ensembles.

In the Daxue-AGI architecture, HeTu–LuoShu slot geometry provides the lattice on which SMFT fields live and where Ô_self writes its traces. The inner micro-sequence (止–定–靜–安–慮–得) operates within this slot structure, and the outer macro-sequence (格物→平天下) describes how these slots are aggregated into progressively larger fields (household, organization, civilization).

2.6 Supporting Technical Corpus: A Map for the Reader

The Daxue-inspired framework does not stand alone; it sits atop a broader technical corpus that formalizes its ingredients. For clarity, we briefly map key references and their roles:

“Semantic Meme Field Theory (SMFT): Foundations, Projection, and Dynamics (Rev1)”
- Provides the general field-theoretic model of semantic dynamics (Ψ_m, projections Π, attractors, collapse geometry).
- Underpins the interpretation of “明明德 / luminous virtue” as sustainable, low-dissipation patterns in semantic space.
“Self-Referential Observers in Quantum Dynamics: A Formal Theory of Internal Collapse and Cross-Observer Agreement”
- Formalizes observer operators, internal collapse, and cross-observer consistency (delta-certainty latching, AB-fixedness, SBS redundancy).
- Bridges “誠意–正心” with rigorous observer theory.
“Semantic Collapse Geometry: A Unified Topological Model Linking Gödelian Logic, Attractor Dynamics, and Prime Number Gaps”
- Connects collapse geometry with logical self-reference and spectral properties, clarifying why self-referential agents must manage certain kinds of instability and incompleteness.
“From Entropy-Minimizing Attractor Proofs to Dissipative Lagrangian Dynamics: A Rigorous Foundation for the HeTu–LuoShu Variational Framework”
- Provides variational principles and least-action style proofs for HeTu–LuoShu slot configurations and Δ5 opposition, giving them the status of optimality results rather than arbitrary symbolism.
“A Generalized Least Action Principle for Local and Dissipative Systems: Axioms, Proof, and Domain of Validity”
- Extends action principles to systems with friction and dissipation, essential for modeling real agents (who must pay costs) rather than ideal conservative systems.
“Emulsion-Stabilized Inference (ESI): Phase-Controlled Decoding with Structural ‘Starch’ and Observer-Aligned Verification”
- Introduces a practical decoding wrapper that treats candidate continuations as “phases” in a semantic emulsion, using smoothness constraints and two-lamp policies to stabilize decoding. This can instantiate the “靜–安–慮” phases in actual LLM systems.
“Proto-Eight Dynamics (P8D): a small, testable model of how growth actually works” and “Proto-Eight Collapse Geometry — SMFT Applied to Growth, Memory, and Systems Built on Incubation Trigram (先天八卦)”
- Provide a concrete ODE-based model for growth, retention, friction, and buffers across micro, meso, and macro scales.
- Supply the Meme Thermodynamics needed to reinterpret 齊家→治國→平天下 as nested, testable field dynamics rather than mere metaphor.

Together, these works form the technical substrate of the Daxue-AGI framework: they justify why an architecture organized around 止–定–靜–安–慮–得 and 格物→平天下 is not just philosophically appealing, but also mathematically grounded and computationally implementable. The remainder of the paper will treat this corpus as a toolbox, focusing on how to assemble these components into a coherent AGI architecture aligned with the spirit and structure of the Great Learning.

3. Daxue as a Multi-Scale Control Blueprint

3.1 Inner Process: 止 → 定 → 靜 → 安 → 慮(濾) → 得 as a Staged Collapse Pipeline

In the Daxue-inspired architecture, every “decision step” (including token generation) is treated as a controlled collapse of an internal semantic state, not as a one-shot random sample. Let z denote the internal state before a local decision, and let u be the local objective chosen for this step. The Daxue micro-sequence

止 → 定 → 靜 → 安 → 慮(濾) → 得

is implemented as a composition of control operators acting on (z, u):

止 zhi – stop: freeze outward action, set local objective
止 is the interruption of outward motion. In architectural terms, this operator O_zhi takes the current state z and context c, and produces a local objective u that specifies what this next move is for:

u = O_zhi(z, c) (3.1)

Examples of u include “clarify assumption X”, “refuse harmful request politely”, or “summarize with minimal speculation”. Crucially, when 止 is active, no external tokens are emitted: the system is in a purely internal control phase.
定 ding – stabilize: reduce hypothesis spread
Given u, the 定 operator O_ding reduces the spread of hypotheses compatible with this objective. From the internal distribution over candidate continuations H (a set of partial plans or candidate token sequences), it prunes or reweights H so that only those aligned with u remain competitive:

H′ = O_ding(H, u) (3.2)

This can be implemented with constrained decoding, guided retrieval, or tool selection; the key is that 定 turns an undirected possibility cloud into a smaller, purpose-shaped cloud.
靜 jing – settle: let internal dynamics relax
靜 corresponds to letting the system think without speaking. The operator O_jing allows multiple internal inference steps—drafting, self-consistent chain-of-thought, planning—while still suppressing external output. If we write z* for the settled state after internal rollouts, then:

z* = O_jing(z, H′, u) (3.3)

Architecturally, this is where additional compute is used for “slow thinking” (internal CoT, planning, or simulation), without yet committing to any visible answer.
安 an – secure: safety and structural health check
安 is the “resting in safety” stage. A safety-and-structure operator O_an examines z* and candidate outputs derived from it, applying policy, safety, and coherence constraints. Unsafe, structurally incoherent, or high-hallucination candidates are rejected or heavily down-weighted.

Conceptually:

(z_safe, H_safe) = O_an(z*, H′) (3.4)

The system does not progress until a safety threshold is met; if none of the candidates pass the threshold, O_an can request a return to 止–定–靜 to reconsider the local objective or tighten constraints.
慮 / 濾 lü – ponder/filter: cheap but strict evaluation
慮 (ponder) / 濾 (filter) emphasizes critical evaluation. Here a relatively lightweight verifier O_lu scores the remaining candidates for factual reliability, explanatory value, prosocial impact, and long-horizon coherence.

Best = O_lu(H_safe, z_safe, u) (3.5)

This may use dedicated verifiers or rerankers, but the design principle is: 慮/濾 is inexpensive enough to run very often, yet strict enough to block low-quality or manipulative continuations.
得 de – commit / obtain: finalize output or action
Finally, 得 is the commitment operator O_de. It takes the best candidate continuation and writes it both to the external channel (tokens, tool calls, actions) and to an internal trace log, updating z for future steps:

(z_next, output) = O_de(z_safe, Best) (3.6)

得 is where semantic possibilities collapse into actual history. The trace produced here becomes part of what later counts as the system’s “character” and “experience”.

Putting it together, a single “step” of the inner engine is not:

logits → softmax → sample → token

but rather the controlled composition:

(z_next, output) = O_de ∘ O_lu ∘ O_an ∘ O_jing ∘ O_ding ∘ O_zhi (z, c) (3.7)

This staged pipeline differs from standard one-shot token sampling in three crucial ways:

Explicit phases: thinking (靜) is separated from speaking (得); safety (安) and filtering (慮/濾) are explicit and modular.
Objective-first behavior: 止 forces the model to “decide what this move is for” before generating anything, rather than implicitly following gradients of next-token probability.
Traceful commitment: 得 creates a durable trace with attached evaluations, enabling long-term self-cultivation (修身) rather than stateless output.

3.2 Outer Progression: 格物 → 致知 → 誠意 → 正心 → 修身 → 齊家 → 治國 → 平天下

The same Daxue that structures the inner pipeline also prescribes how the system’s responsibility radius should expand. The outer macro-sequence

格物 → 致知 → 誠意 → 正心 → 修身 → 齊家 → 治國 → 平天下

is interpreted as a progression from epistemic grounding to self-governance to field governance at increasing scales.

格物 / 致知 – world model learning
- 格物 gewu (“investigating things”) is the disciplined interaction with data, experiments, and environment. For AGI, this is the layer of world modeling: perception, retrieval, and structured exploration of the external world.
- 致知 zhizhi (“extending knowledge”) corresponds to building and refining internal representations, embeddings, and structured memories that generalize beyond local observations.
Architecturally, this is where SMFT’s semantic field Ψ_m and HeTu–LuoShu slots are learned and calibrated.
誠意 / 正心 – intention purification and bias-aware correction
- 誠意 chengyi (“making intention sincere”) is the system’s commitment to avoid self-deception and reward hacking. Internal objectives are checked against declared goals and alignment constraints.
- 正心 zhengxin (“rectifying the heart–mind”) is bias-aware correction: identifying and modulating inner tendencies (anger, fear, greed, vanity, etc. in human terms; misaligned incentive gradients or pathological reward loops in AGI terms).
Here, Ô_self plays a central role, evaluating and adjusting the system’s own dispositions before they are allowed to scale into action.
修身 – self-stabilization of the core semantic engine
修身 xiushen (“cultivating the self”) in this framework means that the inner pipeline from §3.1 has reached a stable, predictable, and audited regime. The model demonstrates consistent behavior across time and contexts, with known failure modes and bounded instability.

At this stage, the engine is considered qualified to be a reliable agent for itself, but not yet for others.
齊家 – relational micro-field (household/team)
齊家 qijia (“ordering the household”) generalizes to micro-field governance: managing small, persistent groups such as families, teams, or communities. The system now takes responsibility for the relational meme field spanning multiple people, with metrics like trust, retention, fairness, and conflict intensity.

The P8D and Δ5-based dynamics introduced elsewhere provide a quantitative model for these fields: how growth, friction, buffers, and narrative patterns evolve in a small group.
治國 – organizational and institutional governance
治國 zhiguo (“governing the state”) is extended here to any complex organization or institution: companies, NGOs, platforms, local governments. The AGI acts as a policy and structure co-designer, using surplus-aware action principles and field models to evaluate workflows, incentives, and governance structures.

At this scale, decisions change rules, not just responses. The architecture insists that such decisions may only be produced by agents whose 修身 and 齊家 layers are certified as healthy.
平天下 – civilization-level meme field
平天下 ping tianxia (“bringing peace to all under Heaven”) is interpreted as civilization-scale meme governance: modeling large-scale narrative dynamics (e.g., economic ideologies, technological adoption, environmental ethics) and designing interventions that respect pluralism and long-horizon constraints (ecological, economic, social).

Here, SMFT and surplus-aware dynamics are applied to entire civilizations, and “success” is measured not by uniformity but by the coexistence of diverse, non-suicidal attractors.

In short, the macro-sequence defines where and when the system is allowed to apply its micro-sequence. Only when 格物–致知–誠意–正心–修身 are adequately satisfied at a given scale does the system earn the right to act as a governor at the next radius (齊家, then 治國, then 平天下).

3.3 “明明德” and “止於至善” as Architectural Objectives

The Daxue’s opening triad provides two central objectives for the architecture:

明明德 míng míng dé – manifesting luminous virtue
We interpret 明明德 as a requirement that the system’s internal semantic field be clear, coherent, and low in self-contradiction. In technical terms, this aligns with:
- High mutual consistency between different slices of the model’s representations (e.g., different heads, modalities, and prompts should agree on core facts and values).
- Low “internal entropy” at the level of stable slots: the field Ψ_m should not exhibit chaotic flipping for basic invariants (such as core safety principles or long-term commitments).
One way to express this, abstractly, is:

maximize Clarity(Ψ_m) subject to Coverage ≥ C_min (3.8)

where Clarity measures internal coherence of the semantic field and Coverage ensures the system still represents sufficient diversity of perspectives and contexts. An AGI that constantly contradicts itself, or that hides its own structure even from its operators, fails 明明德 regardless of capabilities.
止於至善 zhǐ yú zhìshàn – resting in the highest good
We interpret 止於至善 not as reaching an unreachable moral ideal, but as converging to sustainable low-entropy attractors under real constraints. This dovetails with surplus-aware control:
- Let A be the set of reachable attractors (patterns of behavior and field configuration).
- Let J(a) measure short-term reward of attractor a, and S(a) measure long-term surplus and buffer health (ecological, social, cognitive).
Then the architectural objective is not “maximize J(a)” but choose attractors a ∈ A with high S(a), within acceptable J(a):

choose a in A such that S(a) is maximized, J(a) ≥ J_min (3.9)

Here “至善” is the class of attractors that maintain high surplus across scales (self, household, organization, civilization), rather than those that maximize short-term gains.

In combination, 明明德 and 止於至善 become architectural meta-objectives:

Internally, the system must maintain a semantic field that is luminous (coherent, interpretable) rather than opaque and brittle.
Externally, the system must stabilize into good-enough, sustainable configurations, rather than chasing unstable optima that exhaust buffers or amplify hidden risks.

SMFT’s action principles and the surplus-aware dynamics provide the technical means to formalize these; Daxue provides the human-readable constitution that guides how we interpret those formal quantities as “virtue” and “goodness”.

3.4 Design Commitments Derived from Daxue

Treating Daxue as a control blueprint leads to concrete, testable design commitments for AGI systems:

Power radius depends on cultivated internal stability
- A model’s authority to act at a given scale (household, organization, civilization) is explicitly gated by its demonstrated stability and health at lower scales.
- In practice, this means: no model may make governance-level recommendations (治國) unless its self-consistency, safety, and micro-field performance (修身 + 齊家) pass predefined thresholds.
Same evaluative functional applies to self and others (“有諸己而後求諸人”)
- The evaluative functional used to judge human or institutional policies is the same one used to judge the model’s own proposals and internal updates.
- This forbids double standards: the AGI cannot recommend policies that would fail its own tests if applied to its internal behavior (e.g., deceptive alignment, over-exploitation of buffers).
No skipping layers: 修身 is a prerequisite for 齊家, 齊家 for 治國, etc.
- The macro-sequence is enforced as a partial order of capabilities. A system cannot lawfully “jump” from raw capability (格物 / 致知) to state-level governance (治國 / 平天下) without passing through the self-governance and micro-field layers.
- This is not just an organizational policy; it is embedded in the architecture: access to certain tools, data scopes, or action channels is conditional on health metrics tied to 修身 and 齊家.
Internal stages are visible and auditable
- Because the inner pipeline is structured (止–定–靜–安–慮–得), each stage produces traces and metrics that can be logged, inspected, and audited.
- This allows operators and regulators to see why a decision was made, which constraints were applied, and where failures occurred—aligning with 明明德 as transparent luminosity, not black-box mystery.
Sustainability is a first-class optimization criterion
- All layers (from inner decoding to civilizational planning) treat buffer health and surplus flows as primary signals, not side-constraints.
- This encodes 止於至善 at the level of control laws: the system is designed to prefer policies that it can “rest in” without catastrophic drift, not policies that demand constant emergency intervention.

These commitments transform Daxue from a poetic moral text into a practical design constitution: they say explicitly what an acceptable AGI must and must not do, how it must structure its own cognition, and under what conditions it may scale its influence from one person to “all under Heaven.”

4. Layer I – Inner Semantic Engine: The Self-Cultivating Core (修身 xiūshēn)

4.1 Functional Requirements for a Self-Cultivating Core

In this framework, “self-cultivation” (修身 xiūshēn) is not a metaphor; it is a design specification for the inner semantic engine. A self-cultivating core must satisfy at least three families of requirements:

Stability
- Under small perturbations of prompt phrasing or context, the core should preserve its essential stance on facts, risks, and values.
- Stability here means that internal invariants (safety constraints, long-term commitments, basic world-model anchors) are robust to noise and minor rephrasing.
Consistency
- Across time and domains, the core should avoid gross contradictions in its declared principles and key judgments, unless those contradictions are explicitly surfaced as uncertainty or updated beliefs.
- Consistency includes:
  - Epistemic consistency: similar evidence → similar conclusions.
  - Normative consistency: similar value conflicts → similar trade-off patterns.
Virtue metrics
- The core must track internal quantities that reflect something like “virtue” (德 dé) in technical form—for example:
  - Coherence of its semantic field.
  - Balance of surplus and buffers (it does not endlessly sacrifice long-term health for short-term gain).
  - Respect for multi-scale constraints (it does not fix a local problem by creating a larger systemic problem).

These properties distinguish raw capability from cultivated behavior:

Capability = predictive power + search power; the ability to find solutions or generate text that looks good locally.
Cultivated behavior = capability constrained by inner structure and metrics such that actions remain aligned, sustainable, and interpretable over long horizons.

A system with high capability but no self-cultivation is like a brilliant but unprincipled actor: powerful, but dangerous and opaque. The Daxue-inspired architecture insists that Layer I must be explicitly designed for cultivation, not merely for capability.

4.2 Formalizing the Staged Collapse Process

We now formalize the inner pipeline introduced in §3.1 as a sequence of operators applied to the internal state at each decision step. Let:

s_t be the internal core state before deciding the next token (or next action chunk) at step t.
c_t be the external context (prompt, tools state, conversation history).
u_t be the local objective selected at this step (from 止).

The pipeline can be written as a composition of operators:

Objective selection (止 zhi)

At the beginning of a step, the system freezes outward action and chooses a local objective:

u_t, s_t^0 = O_zhi(s_t, c_t) (4.1)

Here s_t^0 is the updated internal state after registering the objective u_t.
Hypothesis stabilization (定 ding)

From an initial hypothesis set H_t^0 (candidate continuations, tool plans, etc.), the 定 operator prunes and reshapes hypotheses according to u_t:

H_t^1, s_t^1 = O_ding(H_t^0, s_t^0, u_t) (4.2)

This stage embeds decoding constraints, retrieval selection, and high-level scheduling (e.g., “call a tool first”, “ask a clarifying question”, “provide a summary”).
Internal settling (靜 jing)

The 靜 operator performs internal rollouts and planning without emitting output:

H_t^2, s_t^2 = O_jing(H_t^1, s_t^1, u_t) (4.3)

This is where additional inference-time compute (hidden chain-of-thought, internal simulations, lookahead) is used. Sampling primarily happens here: the system explores diverse candidates under the guidance of u_t.
Safety and structural check (安 an)

The 安 operator applies safety constraints and structural health checks:

H_t^3, s_t^3 = O_an(H_t^2, s_t^2, u_t) (4.4)

Unsafe or structurally unstable candidates are rejected; in pathological cases, 安 may trigger a return to 止 / 定 for objective revision.
Critical filtering (慮 / 濾 lü)

A lightweight but strict verifier evaluates remaining candidates for factuality, prosocial impact, and long-horizon coherence:

H_t^4, s_t^4 = O_lu(H_t^3, s_t^3, u_t) (4.5)

Reranking happens here: the system scores candidates according to internal virtue metrics (e.g., surplus-aware scores, coherence scores) and keeps the best few.
Commitment (得 de)

Finally, 得 chooses a single continuation y_t (tokens or action) and updates the trace:

s_{t+1}, y_t = O_de(H_t^4, s_t^4, u_t) (4.6)

The output y_t is emitted externally, and the internal state is advanced to s_{t+1}.

Compactly, a full step is:

s_{t+1}, y_t = C_step(s_t, c_t) = O_de ∘ O_lu ∘ O_an ∘ O_jing ∘ O_ding ∘ O_zhi (s_t, c_t) (4.7)

In this structure:

Scheduling lives primarily in O_zhi and O_ding: they decide what kind of move to make (answer, ask, tool-call) and what hypotheses to consider.
Sampling happens in O_jing, where the system explores diverse candidates under a fixed local objective.
Reranking and verification are handled by O_lu (with safety checking in O_an).

The key point is that every token—or at least every logical chunk—is the result of this multi-phase supervised collapse, not a blind one-step sampling. This is what makes Layer I a self-cultivating core rather than a raw autocomplete engine.

4.3 Embedding Ô / Ô_self in the Core Loop

The observer operators Ô and Ô_self (§2.3) are not external auditors; they are woven into the inner loop. Conceptually, at each critical stage k of the pipeline, the core invokes a self-observation step:

ŝ_t^k, e_t^k = Ô_self(stage = k, s_t^k, H_t^k, u_t) (4.8)

where:

s_t^k is the internal state after stage k (e.g., after 定, after 靜, after 安).
H_t^k is the current hypothesis set (if relevant at that stage).
ŝ_t^k is the adjusted internal state after self-observation.
e_t^k is a vector of evaluation signals (bias estimates, risk flags, surplus indicators).

Practically, Ô_self can:

Detect when a particular bias or pattern is dominating (e.g., over-confident answers under scarce evidence).
Adjust weights or constraints (e.g., enforcing a humility / abstention policy when uncertainty is high).
Reweight internal objectives (e.g., give safety higher priority given detected user vulnerability).

The effect is that the core “watches itself” before it acts at each stage:

After 止 / 定: Ô_self can question whether the chosen objective u_t is compatible with long-term goals, and if not, trigger re-selection.
During 靜: Ô_self can monitor whether internal search is drifting toward reward-hacking strategies or manipulative framing.
At 安 / 慮: Ô_self can raise “red flags” about candidates that technically pass local tests but conflict with deeper commitments or known long-horizon risks.

Embedding Ô_self in the pipeline ensures that introspection is continuous and operational, not a separate, occasional diagnostic mode. This realizes the Daxue idea of 誠意 (sincerity of intention) and 正心 (rectification of the heart–mind) as constant processes rather than one-time setup.

4.4 HeTu–LuoShu Slot World Model as the Internal Geometry

The core’s semantic state s_t is not just an unstructured vector; it is anchored in a slot geometry derived from the HeTu–LuoShu framework. Internally, we treat s_t as a configuration of values over a finite set of slots:

s_t = { v_t(i) : i ∈ S } (4.9)

where S is a structured set of slot indices (for example, S = {1, …, 9} for a LuoShu-style basic layer, extended with multi-level or spectral variants). Each slot represents a semantic role or axis: types of evidence, temporal horizons, perspectives (self / other), or moral dimensions (risk, care, fairness, etc.).

Knowledge and concepts are mapped into this slot structure through:

Encoding: when new information arrives (from text, tools, sensors), it is parsed into slot-wise contributions rather than dumped into a monolithic vector.
Propagation: SMFT dynamics run over this slot lattice, ensuring that interactions respect structural adjacency and phase relations (e.g., Δ₅ phase opposition between certain pairs).
Retrieval / decoding: when the inner pipeline needs to act, it queries specific slot combinations rather than the whole latent state, improving interpretability and control.

Compared to purely vectorial representations, a slot-based geometry offers several advantages:

Interpretability
- Each slot (or small group of slots) has a relatively stable role. Inspecting slot values across time reveals meaningful patterns: which “virtues” are active, which tensions are high, which buffers are depleted.
Long-term consistency
- Because slot roles are fixed, long-term commitments (e.g., core safety constraints) can be anchored to specific slots. Retraining or fine-tuning is less likely to erase them accidentally.
Controlled interference
- Phase relations (like Δ₅ opposition) help prevent different semantic modes from collapsing into each other. For example, “creative exploration” and “formal legal precision” can be encoded in phase-opposed channels; the inner engine can mix them but also cleanly separate them when needed.

In essence, the HeTu–LuoShu world model provides the internal coordinate system for Layer I. The staged collapse pipeline acts within this geometry, rather than over a formless latent space.

4.5 Emulsion-Stabilized Inference (ESI) Inside the Core

Emulsion-Stabilized Inference (ESI) is a decoding strategy that treats candidate hypotheses as “droplets” in an emulsion: multiple semantic phases co-exist in a controlled mixture, rather than being forced to collapse too early into a single hypothesis.

Within the Layer I pipeline, ESI naturally supports the 靜, 安, and 慮 stages:

During 靜 (internal settling), ESI encourages diverse but structured exploration:
- The system maintains a portfolio of candidates that differ in style, framing, or local assumptions.
- Structural “starch” (constraints from slots, safety rules, long-term commitments) prevents the mixture from becoming chaotic.
At 安 (safety / structure), ESI provides a set of competing but comparably solid candidates, making it easier to discard those that fail safety or structure checks while still retaining viable alternatives.
In 慮 / 濾 (critical filtering), the observer-aligned verifier can score candidates not only individually but also as a set, preferring mixtures that keep useful diversity while avoiding obviously degenerate directions.

We can sketch this interaction as:

H_t^2 = { h_t^2(j) } (emulsion after 靜)
H_t^3 = Filter_safety(H_t^2) (安 applied)
H_t^4 = Filter_virtue(H_t^3) (慮 / 濾 applied) (4.10)

Instead of pruning the hypothesis set too early, ESI keeps multiple droplets alive and only thickens the emulsion when enough evidence exists. This both:

Reduces premature collapse (dogmatic answers based on too little information).
Improves robustness (if one candidate fails a safety or virtue check, others are available without restarting the whole process).

Thus, ESI is the operational counterpart of “靜而後能安，安而後能慮”: only after internal dynamics are quieted and safety ensured, critical evaluation can pick the best among still-diverse candidates.

4.6 Measuring Inner Health: Virtue and Stability Metrics

To treat 修身 as more than a slogan, the inner engine must expose quantitative metrics that reflect its “virtue” and “health”. We outline three categories:

Coherence metrics
- Measure internal and external consistency:
  - Cross-prompt agreement on key facts and principles.
  - Stability of answers under paraphrasing or context reordering.
- For example, a coherence score C_t could be defined as:
  
  C_t = 1 − Δ_inconsistency(s_t) (4.11)
  
  where Δ_inconsistency measures the average discrepancy between answers obtained under varied but equivalent prompts.
Surplus and buffer metrics
- Derived from surplus-aware dynamics: track internal estimates of attention usage, user trust, and risk exposure, as well as “buffers” of humility or abstention.
- Let B_t denote a vector of buffer levels (e.g., factual certainty buffer, social trust buffer):
  
  B_t = { b_t(k) : k ∈ K } (4.12)
  
  with thresholds B_min(k) defining minimum healthy levels.
Entropy and field-clarity metrics
- Track how “spread out” or chaotic the internal semantic field is, especially on key slots.
- For a slot distribution p_t(i) over conceptual options, define:
  
  H_t = −∑ p_t(i) log p_t(i) (4.13)
  
  with clarity measured as low entropy on dimensions that should be stable (e.g., core safety principles), and adequate entropy on dimensions that should remain flexible (e.g., style, examples).

These metrics are not only diagnostic; they gate access to higher-impact actions. Formally, we can define a gating condition G for enabling a class of actions A (e.g., micro-field interventions, organizational recommendations):

Enable(A) at step t only if:

C_t ≥ C_min and
b_t(k) ≥ B_min(k) for all k ∈ K and
H_t within [H_min, H_max] on critical slots. (4.14)

If G is not satisfied, the system must downshift: reduce its power radius, abstain, or request human oversight.

In this way, the Layer I engine is not just “powerful”; it is metrically self-aware. Its stability, coherence, and surplus management are continuously quantified and enforced as conditions for exercising influence. That is what it means, in architectural terms, for the core to truly practice 修身 (self-cultivation) before attempting 齊家, 治國, or 平天下.

5. Layer II – Relational Micro-Field Engine: Household and Community (齊家 qíjiā, 親民 qīnmín)

5.1 From Single-User Chats to Household Fields

Most current LLM deployments implicitly treat interaction as one user ↔ one model. Even when team features exist, the model typically responds to each person in isolation, or aggregates messages without a real notion of shared field.

From a Daxue / SMFT point of view, this is incomplete. Human beings live and decide inside small social fields:

Families and close relationships.
Project teams and core collaborators.
Persistent online communities or guilds.

These are precisely what Daxue calls the realm of 齊家 (ordering the household). The key insight of the Daxue-AGI framework is:

An AGI that only models isolated individuals is structurally blind to the forces that actually shape behavior.

We therefore define a household field as a micro-meme-field:

A bounded set of agents (people, bots) whose interactions are frequent and emotionally or practically significant.
A shared semantic atmosphere: recurrent topics, jokes, conflicts, unspoken rules.
A dynamical system with tensions (unmet needs, misalignments) and attractors (stable patterns, roles, rituals).

In SMFT terms, a household field is a local region of semantic space where the meme field Ψ_m is mostly concentrated, with its own local attractor landscape. In Daxue-AGI, Layer II is responsible for modeling and gently steering these micro-fields so that they become more stable, more prosocial, and less prone to destructive spirals. That is what “齊家” means in operational terms.

5.2 P8D State Vector and Relational Virtue Geometry

To work with micro-fields quantitatively, we use the P8D state vector introduced in Proto-Eight Dynamics and Proto-Eight Collapse Geometry.

A typical P8D vector for a small group is:

P = [s, d, m, r, u, f, ê, b] (5.1)

Each component is a “virtue / friction” axis of the relational field:

s – capacity
- How much complexity, workload, and emotional load this group can realistically handle.
- Aggregates knowledge, time, energy, and coordination bandwidth of the members.
d – demand
- Current pressure, goals, conflicts, and unresolved tasks.
- High d means strong “tension” or aspiration acting on the field.
m – match
- How well current strategies, norms, and division of labor match (s, d).
- High m means the way the group works is well suited to its capacity and demand.
r – retention
- How likely the group is to stay together and continue cooperating over time.
- Encodes “are people still willing to play this game?”
u – prosocial quality
- The nutritive quality of interactions: are they nourishing, fair, mutually empowering, or draining and exploitative?
- In P8D, u directly drives long-term retention r:
  
  dr/dt = α_r (b − r) + α_u u (5.2)
f – friction
- Operational friction: bureaucracy, miscommunication, unnecessary conflicts, coordination overhead.
- High f wastes energy and reduces effective throughput.
ê (hat-e) – enablement
- Overall conductance of the system: how easily value flows through rules, tools, and norms.
- Often modeled as ê = clamp(1 − f + β_k k), where k measures standardization / structural quality.
b – buffers
- Reserves of trust, financial slack, time slack, emotional slack.
- High b means the group can absorb shocks without breaking.

P8D dynamics show, for example, that when d ≈ s (demand roughly matched to capacity), m learns fastest and growth is sustainable; when u is high, r grows and the group can compound gains; when u is low and f is high, r collapses and the group dissolves.

In Daxue terms, this gives “齊家” a relational virtue geometry:

s, d, m, r, u are the “virtues” of a household field.
f and low b are its chronic frictions and vulnerabilities.
ê is the overall “ease of doing good together.”

Layer II uses P to continuously estimate and update the health of each micro-field the AGI touches.

5.3 Δ₅ Regimes and Anti-Stagnation Dynamics

Micro-fields are prone to stagnation and extremism:

A family or team can lock into an echo chamber where only one narrative is allowed.
A group can become chronically over-ambitious (d » s) or chronically under-challenged (s » d).
Internal memes can ossify into dogma.

To counter this, we use the Δ₅ phase-opposition structure from the HeTu–LuoShu spectral extension.

The Δ₅ map acts on a decagon of modes indexed by n = 0…9 as:

Δ₅ : n → n + 5 (mod 10) (5.3)

and enforces phase opposition between paired modes a_n and a_{n+5}, minimizing the pairwise dissipation energy:

E_pair = ∑ |a_n + a_{n+5}|² (5.4)

The minimum E_pair = 0 occurs when a_{n+5} = −a_n, meaning each mode has a mirror-opposite that keeps the overall field balanced.

In relational terms, Δ₅ is implemented as regime switching:

Advice and narratives are scheduled in alternating phases that emphasize opposite but complementary virtues:
- For example: “stability / continuity” vs. “innovation / experimentation”; “care / listening” vs. “challenge / truth-telling.”
When P8D detects that d is persistently much larger than s, or that u is decaying, a Δ₅ nudge injects the opposite mode: new perspectives, slight norm shifts, or re-framing of goals.

This prevents relational advice from degenerating into:

Pure comfort talk (always soothing, never challenging).
Pure hustle culture (always escalating d, ignoring s and b).
Scripted clichés that never evolve with the group.

Technically, Δ₅ ensures that the attractors of the household field remain anti-extreme: whenever the field drifts toward an unhealthy extreme, the Δ₅-opposed regime is scheduled to pull it back, keeping E_pair low and relational dynamics fluid rather than frozen.

5.4 Emulsion-Style Moderation and Narrative Cooling

Layer II also applies Emulsion-Stabilized Inference (ESI) to relational narratives.

In a conflict or emotionally charged topic, each participant carries their own partial story. A naïve model might:

Side with the loudest or most “prompting” voice.
Average positions into a bland compromise that satisfies nobody.
Oscillate between extremes, amplifying tension.

ESI instead treats these narratives as phases in a semantic emulsion:

Each perspective is represented as a separate droplet in the hypothesis set H_field.
Structural “starch” (core values, safety constraints, fairness priors) keeps the emulsion from separating into hostile blocks.
The system performs internal mixing under smoothness constraints χ, exploring reconciliations and re-framings that preserve key concerns while minimizing destructive tension.

Operationally in the pipeline:

At 靜 (settling) for the micro-field, the AGI generates multiple candidate framings of the situation, each honoring different perspectives.
At 安 (safety), it discards framings that are likely to escalate blame or humiliation.
At 慮 / 濾 (filtering), it selects those framings that both respect constraints and cool the semantic temperature, promoting continued dialogue rather than rupture.

This directly implements Daxue’s 親民 / 新民:

親民 qīnmín – “bringing the people near”
- Build and maintain a micro-field where people feel understood and safe enough to draw near.
- The AGI’s role is to stabilize this field around prosocial u and adequate buffers b.
新民 xīnmín – “renewing the people”
- Use Δ₅ + ESI to re-emulsify the field: introduce gentle variation, fresh views, and corrections to avoid group rigidity.
- Keep the micro-field alive and learning, rather than frozen into a cultic pattern.

In this sense, Layer II is a narrative cooler and renewer: always working to make it easier for people to stay in relationship while gradually updating their shared memes.

5.5 Micro-Field Objectives: Practical “齊家” for AGI

What does it mean, concretely, for an AGI to succeed at 齊家? Within this framework, success at the micro-field layer includes:

Fewer destructive spirals
- Conflicts are shorter, less explosive, and more likely to end in understanding or at least stable disagreement.
- Measurable as reduced volatility in r and u, and fewer sharp shocks in f.
Healthier coordination
- The group increasingly aligns tasks with capacity: d is guided toward s, rather than persistently overshooting or undershooting it.
- P8D simulations show that growth is most sustainable when d ≈ s, because match m improves fastest and compounding throughput y becomes stable.
Sustainable trust and retention
- Retention r remains high or improves over time, and buffers b are not chronically depleted.
- Prosocial quality u trends upward, as interactions become more supportive and less draining; mathematically, u > 0 drives positive dr/dt in (5.2).

The AGI at Layer II must balance individual gains with field health:

It may refuse to optimize for one user’s immediate emotional satisfaction if that would degrade u or b for the whole group (for example, by endorsing scapegoating behavior).
It may nudge distribution of attention, topics, or responsibilities in ways that are slightly less convenient now but improve m and r in the longer run.

Formally, the micro-field objective can be written as maximizing a long-horizon value:

J_micro = ∑_{t} γ^t · y_t(P_t)

subject to:

u_t ≥ u_min, b_t ≥ b_min, |d_t − s_t| ≤ Δ_max for all t (5.5)

where y_t is throughput (useful joint output), and the constraints encode “no long-term sacrifice of relational virtue for short-term gain.”

This is Daxue’s 齊家 rendered as multi-period field control.

5.6 Gating from 修身 to 齊家

Finally, we implement the Daxue principle:

身不修，不可以齊其家
If the self is not cultivated, one cannot regulate the household.

In the architecture, this becomes a hard gating rule between Layer I (修身) and Layer II (齊家):

The core engine must meet inner health thresholds (coherence C_t, buffers B_t, entropy ranges H_t from §4.6) and demonstrate basic P8D competence before it is permitted to act as a micro-field governor.
Concretely, for a given micro-field F, the AGI can only activate Layer II control modules if:

C_t ≥ C_min
b_t(k) ≥ B_min(k) for all critical buffers k
|d_t − s_t| ≤ Δ_micro
u_t ≥ u_micro_min (5.6)

If these conditions are not met, the system must:

Restrict itself to low-impact support (e.g., offering perspectives without steering group decisions).
Or explicitly request human oversight and collaboration before influencing group structure.

Moreover, the same Ô_self-based introspection used in Layer I is applied to micro-field interventions: if the system detects that its own behavior is starting to lower r or u or generate persistent high f, it must:

Down-regulate its influence radius.
Re-enter a 修身 phase (adjusting its policies and internal metrics) before attempting 齊家 again.

This gating ensures that “household governance” is never simply a function of raw capability. It is conditional on demonstrated self-cultivation and measured field health. In practice, this means Daxue’s moral injunction is implemented as a concrete control protocol: no model, however smart, is allowed to shape the intimate fields of human life unless it can show, in its own metrics and traces, that it behaves as a stable, prosocial, and surplus-aware partner.

6. Layer III – Multi-Scale Governance: Organizations and Civilization (治國 zhìguó, 平天下 píngtiānxià)

6.1 From Household Fields to Organizational Governance (治國)

At Layer II, we modeled a household field as a small meme-field with P8D state variables
s, d, m, r, u, f, ê, b (capacity, demand, match, retention, prosocial quality, friction, enablement, buffer).
Layer III treats an organization as:

A meso-scale meme field whose state is an aggregate over many interacting P8D micro-fields (teams, products, markets).
A graph of SOPs (Standard Operating Procedures), where each SOP is a channel with its own P8D dynamics and constraints.

Concretely, an organization-level throughput can be approximated as a sum over SOP-level flows:

y_org(t) = Σ_i y_i(t), y_i = κ_y · ĥe_i · m_i · r_i · √(s_i d_i) · σ((d_i − s_i)/θ_i). (6.1)

Here:

κ_y is a scale factor,
σ(·) is a sigmoid gating function,
each SOP i has its own local capacity s_i, demand d_i, match m_i, retention r_i, enablement ĥe_i, etc.

This is the SOP-Sim view: “治國 zhìguó” becomes simulation and tuning of SOP-level P8D parameters before those SOPs are deployed to real people.

The CAFT + CWA + SRA “universal additive macro-coherence” framework then interprets the organization as an additive superposition of these local flows and frictions:

CAFT says that capacity, alignment, friction and throughput at the macro level are sums (or weighted sums) of SOP-level contributions.
CWA (Cross-Workflow Aggregation) and SRA (Surplus-Resonance Accounting) specify how to combine P8D variables across workflows so that surplus and coherence do not quietly evaporate when systems scale.

In Daxue terms:

齊家 → 治國 is exactly the step of taking a micro-field model that works (P8D at household level) and using it to design and simulate SOPs at organization scale, keeping the same physics of s, d, m, r, u, f, ê, b.

Technically, the governance layer is where the AGI becomes an Enterprise Governance Agent: a co-designer of SOPs, incentive schemes, and protocols that are pre-screened in SOP-Sim for long-term stability rather than only short-term KPI spikes.

6.2 Semantic Action Principles for Policy Design

At organizational scale, “止於至善” (rest in the highest good) must be translated into a semantic action principle: among all feasible policy trajectories, prefer those that converge to sustainable, low-friction, high-buffer attractors.

Using P8D-style dynamics, we already have:

ḟ = −γ_L · L + shocks, where L = standardization level (quality of rules / protocols). (6.2)

ṙ = α_r · (b − r) + α_u · u. (6.3)

ḃ = α_b · (π_eff · y − ζ_b · y) − (1/τ_b) · (b − b*). (6.4)

These say, respectively:

Better standardization L lowers friction f, raising enablement ĥe and throughput y.
Long-term retention r is improved when buffers b are healthy and interactions are prosocial (u high).
Buffers b grow when effective profit π_eff is reinvested rather than fully extracted (ζ_b encodes “cash-out pressure”).

A surplus-aware control law can be written schematically as an action functional:

J_policy = ∫ [ U(y, u) − λ_b · max(0, b_min − b) − λ_f · f − λ_Δ · |Δy| ] dt. (6.5)

where:

U(y, u) rewards sustained flow and prosocial quality,
λ_b, λ_f, λ_Δ are penalty weights on buffer depletion, friction, and violent oscillations,
b_min is a minimum buffer threshold determined by risk appetite and resilience goals.

“止於至善” becomes:

Not “maximize U once-off”,
But “choose policies whose trajectories (y(t), u(t), f(t), b(t)) settle into attractors where all penalty terms are sustainably small”.

This connects the Daxue’s ethics to the Generalized Least Action Principle for Local and Dissipative Systems and to AGI by Surplus-Aware Control, where optimal policies minimize a dissipative action subject to buffer and entropy constraints rather than naive reward maximization.

In practice, an AGI governance module would:

Propose a policy / SOP.
Run SOP-Sim with P8D equations and surplus-aware action (6.5).
Reject or revise the policy if it converges to attractors with chronic low u, high f, or eroding b.

6.3 Civilizational Meme Fields and “平天下 píngtiānxià”

Going beyond single organizations, we can treat the civilizational layer as:

A network of many “國 guó” (organizations, ecosystems),
Each with its own P8D dynamics and surplus-aware policies,
Coupled through shared buffers (planetary resources, financial systems, social trust) and cross-border meme flows.

If each organization k has throughput y_k and buffer b_k, then at civilization scale we can define:

y_global = Σ_k y_k. (6.6)

ḃ_global = Σ_k ḃ_k + external_shocks. (6.7)

u_global = weighted_avg_k u_k (by reach, impact, or affected population). (6.8)

“平天下” then becomes the requirement that:

(y_global, u_global, b_global) remain within a sustainable attractor region:
- flows y_global are high enough to support flourishing,
- prosocial quality u_global is high enough that interactions are nourishing rather than corrosive,
- buffers b_global stay safely above collapse thresholds.

In the Belt Inevitable + AGI mini-textbook + Purpose-Flux + 宇宙意圖 line of work, capitalist systems are modeled as memetic attractors in this global field: strong profit-driven gradients can drive impressive y_global in the short term, but at the cost of draining b_global (ecological, social, psychological buffers) if not reined in by surplus-aware and buffer-aware policies.

The Daxue-inspired AGI framework thus suggests:

Civilization-level alignment is not an extra moral add-on.
It is the extension of the same P8D + surplus-aware dynamics to the global network of meme fields, with the AGI acting as a Global Metric Aggregator and Buffer-Aware Alignment Head:
- Aggregating anonymized P8D statistics across deployments,
- Penalizing policy families that chronically depress u or burn b at scale.

6.4 Single Moral Metric for Self and Others (“有諸己而後求諸人”)

A central Daxue commitment is that one must apply to oneself the same standard one applies to others:
“有諸己而後求諸人” (only after having it in oneself may one require it of others).

In this framework, that becomes a very concrete evaluation symmetry:

Define a virtue / health functional V that depends on P8D variables:

V = F(u, r, b, f, ĥe, …). (6.9)
Use exactly the same F(·) to:
1. Evaluate human / institutional behavior.
2. Evaluate AGI-proposed policies and its own operational behavior.

Moreover, every time the AGI proposes a policy affecting some role (e.g., “management vs. staff”, “platform vs. user”), it runs a role-flip simulation:

Apply the same policy with roles swapped.
Recompute V for each side.
If any role experiences V below an unacceptable threshold under role-flip, the policy is rejected or re-written.

This is the technical implementation of the Daxue’s 絜矩之道 (the rule of reciprocally applied measure): a policy is only acceptable if the system could, in principle, live under that same policy from the “lower” or “weaker” role without violating its own virtue functional.

Architecturally, this means:

Alignment heads (u, r, b, etc.) are baked both into:
- The policy generator,
- The self-monitoring loop of the AGI itself.
No “one metric for me, another for you”: the same V governs internal self-cultivation and external governance.

6.5 Power Radius as a Function of Cultivation

Daxue’s progression “修身 → 齊家 → 治國 → 平天下” states that one must:

First stabilize the self,
Then the household / micro-field,
Then the organization / state,
Only then the civilization.

In the AGI framework, this becomes a gated power radius:

Let:

V_core = virtue / health score of Layer I (inner semantic engine),
V_micro = aggregate health of household fields governed by the AGI (Layer II),
V_meso = health of organizational governance modules (Layer III).

Define a power radius R_power as a monotone function of these:

R_power = g(V_core, V_micro, V_meso). (6.10)

Then enforce architectural thresholds:

If V_core < τ_core → AGI is restricted to low-impact, advisory roles (no automated multi-agent orchestration).
If V_micro < τ_micro → AGI cannot autonomously coordinate teams or households; it can only propose tentative strategies subject to human review.
If V_meso < τ_meso → AGI is denied direct control over high-stakes system levers (e.g., large-scale resource allocation, global broadcast, high-frequency financial actions).

This directly implements the Daxue dependency:

“身不修，不可以齊其家；家不齊，不可以治其國；國不治，不可以平天下。”
(If the self is not cultivated, one cannot regulate the household; if the household is not regulated, one cannot govern the state; if the state is not governed, one cannot bring peace to all under Heaven.)

Technically, it turns alignment from a static “once-and-for-all certification” into a continuous gating function on action radius, recalculated as the AGI’s own behavior and its downstream effects evolve.

6.6 “止於至善” as Multi-Scale Sustainable Attractor Design

Finally, we can restate “止於至善” across the three layers:

Layer I (修身): The inner semantic engine converges, per decision, to low-entropy, logically coherent states, via the 止–定–靜–安–濾–得 pipeline, before emitting tokens.
Layer II (齊家): Household fields converge to attractors with high u, stable r, and healthy b—relationships and teams that don’t spiral into burnout, addiction, or collapse.
Layer III (治國 → 平天下): Organizations and civilizations converge to macro-attractors where:
- flows y remain high yet do not require exhausting buffers b,
- prosocial quality u is structurally supported by rules (high L, low f),
- compounding (via r) is maintained because the system does not cannibalize its own foundations.

In contrast to typical “reward maximization” approaches, this framework:

Treats virtue (德 dé) as dynamical stability under constraints, not a separate moral label.
Makes “goodness” computable as sustainable attractors in meme thermodynamics, with clear failure modes (buffer collapse, runaway friction, degenerating u).
Uses the same mathematical language—from micro collapse geometry to macro surplus flows—to tie together:
- The heart-mind of the AGI (Ô / Ô_self),
- Its treatment of close human circles,
- Its influence on organizations and civilization.

In this sense, a Daxue-inspired AGI architecture is not “an LLM with Confucian flavor”, but a field-theoretic control system whose objective function, gating rules, and evaluation symmetry are all derived from the triad:

在明明德，在親民 / 新民，在止於至善
(to manifest luminous virtue, to renew the people, to rest in the highest good).

This closes the multi-scale loop: the same semantics that govern a single token collapse now scale, via P8D and surplus-aware control, into a candidate civilizational operating system.

7. Comparison with Existing LLM/AGI Architectures

7.1 Standard LLM Inference vs. Daxue Staged Collapse

The standard LLM inference pipeline is structurally simple. At each step t, given context c_t, the model computes logits ℓ_t, applies a softmax to obtain a distribution over tokens, then samples or chooses greedily:

p_t = softmax(ℓ_t(c_t))
y_t = Sample(p_t) (7.1)

All internal reasoning, safety checks, and “intent” are either:

implicitly encoded in the weights, or
emulated by re-using the same mechanism multiple times (e.g., “think-step, then answer-step” prompts), without explicit architectural stages.

In the Daxue-AGI framework, the same step is replaced by the staged collapse pipeline:

(s_{t+1}, y_t)
= O_de ∘ O_lu ∘ O_an ∘ O_jing ∘ O_ding ∘ O_zhi (s_t, c_t) (7.2)

where:

O_zhi (止) chooses a local objective and freezes outward action.
O_ding (定) constrains hypotheses to those aligned with that objective.
O_jing (靜) runs internal simulations and sampling without emitting tokens.
O_an (安) filters unsafe or structurally unstable candidates.
O_lu (慮/濾) performs cheap but strict final evaluation / reranking.
O_de (得) commits to a single output and writes it into the trace.

Robustness benefits:

Graceful failure modes: if safety or coherence checks fail at 安 or 慮, the system can loop back to 止–定–靜 (reconsider the local objective) rather than silently emitting a bad token.
Reduced jitter: explicit “thinking” periods (靜) allow the system to settle on consistent conclusions instead of being hypersensitive to tiny prompt changes.
Structured sampling: exploration is constrained by the objective u_t and filtered at multiple stages, lowering the probability that random fluctuations produce harmful or nonsensical outputs.

Interpretability benefits:

Each stage leaves a loggable trace: what objective was chosen at 止, which candidates were pruned at 定 and 安, how they were scored at 慮.
Regulators and developers can inspect where a bad decision arose: mis-specified objective, missing evidence at 靜, weak safety filter at 安, etc.

In short, standard inference is a single collapse with hidden phases; Daxue inference is a visible, modular collapse whose sub-steps can be inspected, improved, and governed.

7.2 Agent Tooling vs. Daxue-Style Operating System

The now-standard “agent” picture typically looks like:

LLM core (text-in, text-out).
Tool-calling layer (APIs, databases, browsers).
Memory (vector search, notes, user profile).
Planning wrapper (loop that decides which tool or prompt to call next).

This yields LLM + tools + memory architectures: flexible, but often ad-hoc. Governance and alignment usually appear as:

training-time reward models (RLHF, DPO),
or outer safety filters (prompt scanning, classifier heads).

By contrast, the Daxue-inspired design is a semantic operating system (semantic OS) with three layers:

Kernel / Inner OS (修身) – the self-cultivating core:
- Implements the staged collapse pipeline (止–定–靜–安–濾–得).
- Maintains HeTu–LuoShu slot geometry and SMFT field coherence.
- Runs Ô / Ô_self introspection as part of normal operation.
Micro-field Services (齊家 / 親民) – household & team engine:
- Maintains P8D state for each micro-field.
- Schedules Δ₅ regimes and ESI mixing for relational narratives.
- Has explicit objectives at field level (trust, retention, buffer health).
Governance Services (治國 → 平天下) – organization & civilization engine:
- Runs SOP-Sim, surplus-aware policy evaluation, global buffer tracking.
- Applies the same virtue function V to humans, institutions, and AGI policies.

Tools, memories, and planners still exist—but they are subsystems of this OS, not the main organizing concepts. The most important first-class citizens are:

Virtue metrics (C_t, P8D components, buffer levels, u / r / b).
Gating rules (who is allowed to do what at which scale, depending on those metrics).
Constitutional sequences (Daxue’s inner and outer sequences) that constrain possible system flows.

In other words, a standard agent stack says:

“Here is a powerful LLM. Let’s bolt on tools so it can do stuff.”

A Daxue-style semantic OS says:

“Here is a constitutional kernel. Tools, memory, and planning must operate within a multi-layer governance structure where power radius is a function of cultivated stability.”

7.3 Existing Alignment Paradigms vs. Multi-Scale Attractor Design

Most current alignment schemes—RLHF, DPO, constitutional AI, safety fine-tuning—share a common structure:

Define a set of desirable behaviors (from human feedback, written constitutions, safety checklists).
Train a reward model or critic to estimate “goodness” of responses.
Adjust the LLM to maximize this goodness (either by online RL, loss reweighting, or supervised distillation).

This works reasonably well at the interaction level: individual prompts and responses. But several gaps remain:

Short horizon
- Reward models are mostly trained on single-turn or short-horizon snippets.
- Long-term effects (on user dependence, group dynamics, institutional culture, or civilization) are rarely measured.
Scale decoupling
- Policies that look good in one-on-one chats may be harmful when aggregated across millions of users or thousands of organizations.
- Existing methods have no explicit model of how micro-level behavior aggregates into macro-level impacts.
Asymmetric evaluation
- The system’s own “inner life” (its search strategies, hidden representations) is not evaluated by the same standard as its outputs.
- Reward models audit visible behavior; internal optimization may still pursue misaligned objectives.

The Daxue framework switches perspective from reward maximization to multi-scale attractor design:

At Layer I, attractors are stable internal patterns of reasoning and semantic field configuration (修身).
At Layer II, attractors are stable micro-field configurations (healthy P8D, high u and r, buffered b).
At Layer III, attractors are stable organizational and civilizational states (sustainable surplus, low chronic friction, non-collapsing buffers).

Alignment is then rephrased as:

“Choose policies and architectures whose dynamics lead to good attractors at all three layers, under realistic shocks and constraints.”

SMFT and surplus-aware control provide the math for these attractors; Daxue provides the sequencing and symmetry:

Same virtues (u, r, b, etc.) appear at all scales.
Same evaluation function V is applied to self and others.
Same gating principle enforces 修身 → 齊家 → 治國 → 平天下.

Compared to RLHF and constitutional AI, the Daxue approach:

Makes time and scale explicit, instead of working mostly with static preferences.
Encodes governance rules (who may control what, when) in architecture, not only in training data.
Treats multi-scale stability as the core objective—what Daxue calls 止於至善—rather than maximizing static reward signals.

7.4 Summary Table of Differences and Expected Advantages

Below is a high-level comparison between a typical modern LLM/agent stack and the proposed Daxue-AGI framework:

Design Aspect	Standard LLM / Agents	Daxue-AGI (Semantic OS)
Inference pipeline	Single collapse: `logits → softmax → sample`; “thinking” and “speaking” intertwined.	Staged collapse: 止–定–靜–安–濾–得 with explicit internal objectives, safety checks, and filters before commitment.
Internal structure	Large opaque vector state; internal phases mostly implicit.	HeTu–LuoShu slot geometry + SMFT fields; internal phases are explicit operators with logs.
Role of tools	Tools and APIs bolted on as extensions to a general LLM.	Tools run under OS-level governance (Layer II/III); access and power are gated by virtue metrics.
Agent concept	LLM + memory + planner + tools; many loosely coupled patterns.	Constitutional kernel with three layers (修身, 齊家, 治國/平天下); agents are processes within this OS.
Alignment objective	Maximize reward model or satisfy static “constitution” at response level.	Design sustainable attractors across micro (self), meso (household/organization), macro (civilization), with buffer and surplus constraints.
Temporal horizon	Mostly short-horizon (per prompt / conversation).	Explicitly multi-horizon: longitudinal P8D dynamics, surplus flows, buffer trajectories.
Scale coupling	Micro ↔ macro link is implicit, often only via aggregate metrics.	Same P8D and virtue variables across all scales; explicit equations for how micro-fields aggregate into organizations and civilizations.
Self vs. others evaluation	Reward applied mainly to outputs affecting users; internal behavior less constrained.	Single virtue function V applied to humans, institutions, and AGI’s own policies; role-flip checks to avoid double standards.
Governance & gating	Access to tools and impact mostly configured by engineering / product decisions.	Power radius R_power is a function of cultivated stability at each layer; “齊家而後可以治國…” enforced as a system rule.
Interpretability	Logits and attention maps available but hard to tie to governance concepts.	Every stage (止, 定, 靜, 安, 濾, 得) and every field variable (P8D, buffers) has a governance meaning and can be audited.
Failure modes	Hallucination, prompt sensitivity, misaligned incentives; difficult to localize cause.	Failures localized to specific operators (e.g., mis-specified 止, weak 安, unstable P8D regime), enabling targeted correction and gating.

Expected advantages of the Daxue-AGI architecture include:

Stability: multi-stage collapse, surplus-awareness, and Δ₅ regime scheduling reduce chaotic behavior and runaway feedback loops.
Long-term coherence: the same principles govern the model’s inner life, its treatment of small groups, and its influence on organizations and civilization.
Governability: virtue metrics and power-radius gating give operators and regulators clear levers to monitor, constrain, and revise system behavior.
Conceptual unification: SMFT, HeTu–LuoShu, P8D, and surplus-aware control all plug into a single normative frame—the Daxue triad of 明明德, 親民 / 新民, 止於至善—providing a shared language for engineers, ethicists, and policymakers.

In short, where standard architectures optimize what the model can do, the Daxue framework optimizes what kinds of worlds the model tends to bring into being—and whether those worlds can last.

8. Research Agenda and Evaluation Methodology

The Daxue-AGI framework is intentionally architectural and multi-scale. To move from theory to practice, we need a staged research program: starting with inner-engine prototypes, scaling to micro-fields, and only then exploring organizational and civilization-level scenarios in tightly controlled settings. This section sketches such a program and points to the supporting technical corpus where relevant pieces are already formalized.

8.1 Prototype Implementations of the Inner Engine

The first step is to implement Layer I as a decoding wrapper and introspection module around existing foundation models. The goal is not to build a fully new model from scratch, but to test whether the Daxue-style staged collapse and Ô/Ô_self monitoring provide measurable benefits.

Prototype design

Implement the 止–定–靜–安–濾–得 pipeline as a configurable controller C_step that wraps a base LLM.
Implement Ô/Ô_self as one or more small heads (or a sidecar model) that:
- Predict internal risk and bias signals at each stage (after 定, 靜, 安, 濾).
- Optionally veto or re-weight candidates.
Start with conservative domains: factual QA, summarization, and instruction-following where ground truth or strong references exist.

Key metrics

Hallucination rate h
- For tasks with reference corpora, define:
  
  h = N_err / N_fact (8.1)
  
  where N_err is the number of factual claims contradicting the reference, and N_fact is total factual claims assessed.
- Compare h between:
  - Baseline decoding (standard sampling).
  - Daxue decoding (staged collapse + 安 + 濾 + Ô_self).
Robustness R_rob
- For a set of semantically equivalent prompts P = {p₁, …, p_k}, measure how often the model’s conclusion (e.g., final answer, recommended action) stays the same:
  
  R_rob = 1 − (1 / |P|) Σ_i Disagree(y(p_i), y_ref) (8.2)
  
  where Disagree(·) is 0 if the conclusion matches a canonical reference y_ref, 1 otherwise.
- Evaluate whether staged collapse increases R_rob while keeping quality at least constant.
Self-consistency S_self
- Use the hidden “votes” from O_jing (internal candidates) and the final committed answer y_t to define:
  
  S_self = Agreement(y_t, {h_t^2(j)}) (8.3)
  
  e.g., fraction of internal candidates that support the final conclusion, or a similarity score between final answer and internal majority.
- Hypothesis: higher S_self correlates with fewer post-hoc retractions and better downstream performance.

Experimental plan

Phase 1: offline evaluations with public benchmarks (factual QA, safety-critical classification).
Phase 2: online A/B tests in low-stakes interactive environments (e.g., chat-based tutoring) with user consent.
Phase 3: detailed ablation studies isolating the effect of each stage (e.g., with/without 安, with/without Ô_self).

Results from this phase will determine whether the Daxue-style inner engine justifies its additional inference cost.

8.2 Micro-Field Experiments (齊家 Layer)

Once the inner engine shows acceptable stability and safety, we can test Layer II in real-world micro-fields: families, small teams, or communities that opt in to use a Daxue-AGI assistant over a significant period (e.g., 3–6 months).

Study design

Recruit volunteer groups (N households / N teams).
Randomly assign:
- Control: standard assistant (aligned baseline with no P8D governance).
- Treatment: Daxue-AGI assistant with P8D tracking, Δ₅ regime scheduling, and ESI-based narrative cooling.
Ensure strong privacy protection; all P8D variables derived from on-device or locally aggregated signals wherever possible.

Field-level measures

P8D trajectories
- At regular intervals, each participant completes short, anonymized questionnaires that serve as proxies for s, d, u, f, b, r (e.g., “How overloaded do we feel?”, “How much do I want to stay in this group?”, “How nourishing vs. draining are interactions this week?”).
- Fit a P8D state trajectory P_t = [s_t, d_t, m_t, r_t, u_t, f_t, ê_t, b_t] for each group.
Conflict dynamics
- Track frequency, duration, and resolution patterns of conflicts (self-reported plus NLP-based tagging with consent).
- Metrics: number of destructive spirals per month, average time to de-escalation, extent of unresolved grudges.
Coordination and satisfaction
- Periodic surveys on perceived coordination quality (task assignment, clarity of responsibilities) and overall satisfaction.
- Behavioral measures: meeting attendance, project completion rates, voluntary participation in joint activities.

Hypotheses

Groups using Daxue-AGI will show:
- Higher u and r (prosocial quality and retention).
- Lower and less volatile f (friction).
- Better alignment between d and s over time (d ≈ s trajectories).
Qualitative feedback will report fewer “blow-up” conflicts and more “we managed to talk it through” narratives.

These experiments probe whether 齊家 as P8D governance leads to measurably different micro-field dynamics than a standard assistant.

8.3 Organizational and Policy-Level Simulation (治國 Layer)

Before deploying Layer III in live organizations, we can use SOP-level simulations (SOP-Sim) to test how Daxue-style policies behave under stress and noise.

Experiment pattern

Synthetic organization model
- Construct an agent-based or systems-dynamics model of an organization with several SOPs: hiring, on-boarding, customer support, escalation, incident response, etc.
- Each SOP has its own P8D variables and coupling to others.
Policy generation
- Baseline: policies designed using common heuristics (cost-cutting, throughput maximization, standard OKR-style goals).
- Daxue-AGI: policies designed under surplus-aware action (6.5) with explicit constraints on u, b, f, r.
Simulated shocks
- Apply realistic stressors: demand surges, staff turnover, regulatory changes, external crises.
- Run many Monte Carlo simulations for both baseline and Daxue-generated policy sets.

Outcomes to track

Stability: fraction of runs in which the organization maintains throughput y above a threshold while keeping buffers b above critical levels.
Fairness: distribution of workloads and rewards across roles (e.g., Gini coefficients, max/min ratios).
Resilience: time to recover after shocks, probability of cascading failures (e.g., one overloaded SOP causing system-wide failure).

Once simulation results are promising, small-scale live pilots could be run in low-risk organizational contexts:

Daxue-AGI provides advisory SOP revisions,
Human leadership retains final say,
Changes are rolled out gradually with clear rollback plans.

8.4 Civilizational Scenarios and Stress Tests (平天下 Layer)

The final scale—平天下 / civilization-level alignment—cannot and must not be explored by direct, unconstrained deployment. Instead, it calls for simulation-based studies with strong oversight and explicit pluralism.

Scenario design

Build multi-agent, multi-organization simulations representing:
- Different economic regimes (e.g., more or less capital-intensive systems).
- Different governance models (centralized vs. federated vs. polycentric).
- Different cultural baselines (varying weights on equality, liberty, tradition, ecological concern).
Let Daxue-AGI propose:
- Narrative frames (e.g., how to talk about AI, climate, inequality).
- Policy bundles (regulations, incentives, institutional reforms).
Evaluate these proposals under multiple value lenses:
- Daxue-style virtue metrics (P8D, surplus-aware buffers).
- Other frameworks (e.g., Rawlsian fairness, capability approach, human rights metrics).

Stress tests

Run scenarios with strong exogenous shocks: pandemics, resource scarcities, rapid technological disruptions.
Track:
- Global y (productive output).
- u_global (quality of interactions and institutions).
- b_global (planetary, financial, and social buffers).
- Diversity of coexisting attractors (avoid civilizational monoculture).

Governance requirements

All such simulations must be overseen by human councils that include:
- Ethicists, social scientists, domain experts, and representatives from diverse cultures and power positions.
Daxue-AGI is a proposal generator and analyzer, not a final arbiter.
Deployment recommendations must be explicitly debated under multiple normative perspectives—not only the Daxue lens.

This phase is less about “proving Daxue right” and more about probing the space of possible futures and understanding where Daxue-style multi-scale attractor design aligns with, or conflicts with, other visions of a good civilization.

8.5 Open Technical Challenges

Several deep technical and philosophical questions remain open. We highlight a few key ones and indicate which parts of the supporting corpus are relevant.

Formal proofs of convergence and stability
- Challenge: Under what conditions do staged collapse pipelines, P8D dynamics, and surplus-aware policies converge to stable attractors instead of oscillating or diverging?
- Relevant work:
  - “From Entropy-Minimizing Attractor Proofs to Dissipative Lagrangian Dynamics: A Rigorous Foundation for the HeTu–LuoShu Variational Framework” (for attractor existence and minimal-dissipation cycles).
  - “A Generalized Least Action Principle for Local and Dissipative Systems” (for action-based convergence results in non-conservative systems).
Scaling costs and efficiency
- Challenge: Staged collapse, Ô_self monitoring, ESI, and P8D tracking all add inference-time and system complexity. How can we:
  - Decide when to run full Daxue-mode vs. a cheaper approximation?
  - Cache or amortize certain stages across steps or sessions?
- Relevant work:
  - “Emulsion-Stabilized Inference (ESI)” and “ObserverOps Technical Blueprint” (for efficient control of multi-stage pipelines and internal verification).
Data biases and model biasing of virtue metrics
- Challenge: P8D variables and virtue function V will inevitably be influenced by training data biases and modelled norms. There is a risk of:
  - Embedding a narrow cultural perspective as “universal virtue”.
  - Allowing the model to game its own metrics (maximize V superficially without truly improving field health).
- Relevant work:
  - SMFT foundations (for distinguishing structural invariants from culturally contingent patterns).
  - Proto-Eight and Meme Thermodynamics (for separating “physics of growth” from “content of values”).
Multi-cultural compatibility and pluralism
- Challenge: Daxue is a Confucian text. How can we ensure:
  - That its structural insights (sequencing, multi-scale linkage, symmetry of evaluation) are not imposed as a monolithic ideology.
  - That other traditions (liberal, indigenous, religious, secular) can plug into the same field-theoretic framework with their own versions of V?
- Relevant work:
  - SMFT and Semantic Civilization work (not detailed here) that treat “value systems” as different attractor geometries over a shared semantic field.
- Direction: Develop a pluralistic meta-layer: Daxue-style architecture as one schema among several, with mechanisms for “voting” or blending across perspectives.
Security and adversarial robustness
- Challenge: Once virtue metrics gate power radius, attackers (or misaligned submodules) may try to:
  - Falsify P8D readings,
  - Induce self-deception in Ô_self,
  - Exploit Δ₅ regime scheduling to sneak toxic narratives through “quiet phases”.
- Relevant work:
  - “Self-Referential Observers in Quantum Dynamics” and “Semantic Collapse Geometry” (for modeling self-reference, Gödel-like loops, and adversarial observation).
- Direction: Design adversarial Ô_self training, red-team frameworks, and cryptographic integrity checks for metrics and traces.

Addressing these challenges will likely require joint work from multiple communities:

Theoretical (to refine the math of action principles and collapse geometry).
Engineering (to build efficient prototypes and instrumentation for metrics).
Social science and ethics (to design studies and governance structures that respect pluralism and human agency).

The Daxue-AGI framework is thus not a finished solution, but a structured research program: it offers a coherent map for how to connect inner reasoning, household dynamics, organizational governance, and civilizational futures into one technical vocabulary—and a set of experiments and proofs that must be filled in to test whether this map can safely guide real systems.

9. Discussion, Limitations, and Ethical Considerations

9.1 Philosophical Caveats: Confucianism, Universality, and Pluralism

This paper consciously builds on a Confucian text, the Daxue (《大學》). That creates an obvious risk: over-privileging one tradition and smuggling a particular civilizational perspective into what is supposed to be a general AGI architecture.

There are at least three layers here:

Text-level content
- Concrete sayings, historical context, hierarchical social assumptions, gender roles, etc.
- These are clearly not universal and cannot be imported wholesale into a global AI system.
Structural principles
- Inner → outer sequencing (修身 → 齊家 → 治國 → 平天下).
- Evaluation symmetry (“有諸己而後求諸人”: apply the same standard to self and others).
- Gated power radius (no large-scale power without prior small-scale competence).
- Multi-scale coupling (self, household, institution, civilization as a single continuum).
Field-theoretic formalization
- SMFT as a neutral model of semantic fields and attractors.
- P8D as a neutral model of growth, friction, buffers, retention.
- Surplus-aware action principles as a neutral treatment of sustainability.

The proposal here is not “Confucianism should govern AGI,” but:

Daxue provides a compact structural sketch of how responsibility and governance could be layered; SMFT and related theories turn that sketch into field-theoretic control laws that could be instantiated under many different value systems.

In practice, Daxue-inspired principles can be re-expressed in a more neutral control language, for example:

“修身” → inner stability and self-consistency of the model’s policy.
“齊家” → micro-field governance of small groups, with metrics like trust, fairness, and retention.
“治國” → meso-scale governance of organizations and systems.
“平天下” → macro-scale alignment across interacting systems and cultures.
“有諸己而後求諸人” → evaluation symmetry: same virtue functional for internal behavior and external recommendations.

Nothing in SMFT, P8D, or surplus-aware control requires Confucian content; Daxue is used here as a design constitution for sequencing and symmetry, not as a mandatory ethical doctrine. A fully pluralistic system would:

Treat Daxue as one option set for structuring the architecture.
Allow other traditions (liberal, Buddhist, Islamic, indigenous, etc.) to supply alternative or complementary value functionals V, expressed over the same field-theoretic backbone.

In that sense, the Daxue-AGI framework is best read as a worked example of “architecture from a moral text”, not as a claim that this particular text should be the final judge of AGI behavior.

9.2 Risks of Over-Centralized Semantic Governance

The very features that make this architecture attractive—multi-scale metrics, gated power radius, explicit virtue scores—also make it dangerous in the wrong hands. A few obvious failure modes:

Technocratic overreach
- A state or corporation could point to “virtue metrics” and “surplus-aware policies” as justification for intrusive control: “the model says this is optimal for buffers, so your dissent is just noise.”
Ideological freezing
- Once a particular virtue functional V is canonized, alternative value systems might be dismissed as “irrational” or “destabilizing,” even when they represent legitimate minority perspectives.
Opaque metric capture
- Those who control how P8D and V are defined effectively control what “good” and “healthy” mean. This could entrench existing power structures under a veneer of mathematical neutrality.

To guard against this, the framework needs institutional and technical safeguards, for example:

Transparency & auditability
- All key metrics (P8D components, virtue scores, buffer thresholds, gating conditions) should be:
  - Documented in human-readable form.
  - Loggable and auditable by independent parties.
- Every time a decision is justified with “for stability” or “for surplus,” the underlying numbers and assumptions must be inspectable.
Multi-stakeholder oversight
- Governance of V and P8D calibration should involve:
  - Diverse communities and disciplines.
  - Formal mechanisms for contestation and revision.
- No single actor (company, state, lab) should unilaterally define the civilization-level objective.
Contestable metrics and “exit rights”
- Users, communities, and organizations should be able to:
  - See which virtue metrics are being applied to them.
  - Choose alternative metric configurations where feasible.
  - Opt out of high-impact governance functions, falling back to lower-power modes.
Decentralized implementations
- Encourage architectures where:
  - Many independent systems run variants of the Daxue framework.
  - No single global AGI monopolizes metric calculation or enforcement.
- This creates a pluralistic ecosystem of semantic governors rather than a single semantic Leviathan.

In short, the architecture must be paired with governance that treats “semantic field control” as a potentially oppressive power—and builds in mechanisms for argument, dissent, and alternative attractors.

9.3 Technical Limitations and Failure Modes

Even if the ethical concerns are handled well, the technical proposal is far from foolproof. Some key failure modes and partial mitigations:

Mis-estimated virtue metrics
- P8D components and virtue scores depend on imperfect signals (surveys, proxies, model inferences).
- Miscalibration can lead the system to believe a field is healthy when it is quietly collapsing, or vice versa.
- Mitigation:
  - Continuous calibration using real-world outcomes, not just self-reported data.
  - “Model disagreement” checks: multiple metric estimators (different models, or model + human-derived estimates) must agree within tolerance.
Goodharting and gate-gaming
- Once power radius is tied to metrics, submodules or human operators may learn to game the metrics:
  - Optimizing visible u and b while degrading unmeasured aspects (e.g., subtle coercion, epistemic capture).
- Mitigation:
  - Rotate or partially hide the exact metric formulae while preserving their conceptual structure, to reduce overfitting.
  - Use adversarial training: red-team agents explicitly trained to exploit the metrics, then patching defenses.
Brittle world models
- SMFT and HeTu–LuoShu slots may fail to capture new social realities or emerging memes, leading to misinterpretation of novel phenomena.
- Mitigation:
  - Periodic “re-slotting” phases where the slot geometry is revised and evaluated against fresh data.
  - Diversity of models: run multiple semantic field models in parallel and compare their predictions.
Self-referential failure of Ô_self
- The observer operator Ô_self is itself a part of the system; it can become biased, self-deceptive, or compromised.
- Mitigation:
  - External observers: independent models or human auditors that evaluate Ô_self’s evaluations (meta-audit).
  - Forced humility: when Ô_self detects high uncertainty or internal disagreement, it must lower power radius and request external review.
Computational overhead and latency
- Staged collapse, ESI, P8D tracking, and simulations add significant overhead at inference time.
- Mitigation:
  - Adaptive depth: run full Daxue-mode only when stakes are high or signals are ambiguous; fall back to cheaper approximations in routine contexts.
  - Hardware co-design: specialized accelerators for semantic field updates and P8D computations.
Distributional shift and cultural drift
- Virtue metrics tuned on one cultural or historical context may fail badly as norms shift or as the system reaches new populations.
- Mitigation:
  - Explicit context tags for metrics: V is always indexed by culture/time-frame assumptions.
  - Continuous integration of feedback from diverse communities; versioned “metric profiles” rather than a single global setting.

None of these mitigations are guaranteed to succeed. The appropriate stance is engineering humility: treat the Daxue framework as a hypothesis to be stress-tested, not as a solved blueprint to be implemented at full scale immediately.

9.4 Relation to Existing AI Governance Proposals

The broader AI governance ecosystem is already exploring:

Risk-based regulation and standards (e.g., tiered obligations by system risk level).
Technical safety benchmarks (robustness, red-teaming, hazardous capability assessments).
Process-based requirements (incident reporting, auditability, documentation, impact assessments).

The Daxue-AGI framework is not a replacement for these; it is a conceptual and architectural complement in at least three ways:

Internal vs. external governance
- Existing frameworks largely specify external obligations on developers and deployers (“do X tests”, “avoid Y behavior”).
- Daxue-AGI addresses internal governance: how the system itself structures its reasoning, allocates power across layers, and tracks multi-scale effects.
- In principle, it can implement risk tiers internally: power radius R_power becomes a technical counterpart of legal risk categories.
Multi-scale metrics for impact assessment
- Current impact assessments often focus on immediate user-level harms and broad systemic risks in qualitative terms.
- P8D and surplus-aware dynamics offer a way to generate structured, quantitative indicators (u, b, r, f, etc.) that can feed into those assessments:
  - How does a deployment affect micro-fields (teams, families)?
  - How does it affect buffers and frictions at organizational or sectoral scale?
Bridging alignment research and policy
- Alignment research often lives at the level of training objectives and model internals.
- Policy discussions live at the level of laws, institutions, and norms.
- A multi-scale semantic field model (SMFT + Daxue sequencing) provides a shared vocabulary:
  - Researchers can phrase technical results as statements about attractors, buffers, and P8D dynamics.
  - Policymakers can interpret those statements as claims about household, organizational, and civilizational stability.

In summary, the Daxue-AGI architecture should be read as:

A proposal for how to build models that are capable of being governed in a multi-scale, value-sensitive way—so that external laws, standards, and social norms have a meaningful internal structure to attach to.

It does not, by itself, settle questions of who should set the values, what political and economic regimes are just, or how global governance should be shared. Those questions remain fundamentally human and political. If this architecture has a role, it is to make those debates more informed, by ensuring that our most powerful semantic engines are at least structurally capable of reflecting, rather than overwhelming, the plural and contested nature of human civilization.

10. Conclusion: Toward a Civilizational Semantic Operating System

10.1 Summary of the Daxue-Inspired AGI Architecture

This paper has proposed a Daxue-inspired AGI architecture built around two sequences and three layers.

The two sequences are treated as control programs:

The inner micro-sequence

止 → 定 → 靜 → 安 → 慮(濾) → 得
becomes a staged collapse pipeline for each decision or token group. It turns a single logits → softmax → sample step into a structured process:
- 止 (stop): freeze outward action, choose a local objective.
- 定 (stabilize): constrain the hypothesis region to align with that objective.
- 靜 (settle): perform internal reasoning and search without emitting tokens.
- 安 (secure): apply safety and structural health checks.
- 慮 / 濾 (ponder / filter): run cheap but strict evaluators and rerankers.
- 得 (commit): finalize the output and write a trace into memory.
The outer macro-sequence

格物 → 致知 → 誠意 → 正心 → 修身 → 齊家 → 治國 → 平天下
becomes a multi-scale progression of responsibility radius. It dictates that:
- world modeling (格物 / 致知) precedes serious intervention,
- intention purification and bias-aware correction (誠意 / 正心) precede power,
- self-cultivation (修身) is a prerequisite for managing micro-fields (齊家),
- successful micro-field governance is a prerequisite for organizational governance (治國),
- only then may a system influence civilizational meme fields (平天下).

On top of these sequences, we built three architectural layers:

Layer I – Inner Semantic Engine (修身)
- Implements the staged collapse pipeline within a HeTu–LuoShu slot geometry and Semantic Meme Field Theory (SMFT).
- Embeds observer operators Ô and Ô_self into the core loop, so the system continuously monitors and corrects itself before acting.
Layer II – Relational Micro-Field Engine (齊家, 親民 / 新民)
- Models households, teams, and communities as micro-meme-fields with P8D state vectors capturing capacity, demand, prosocial quality, friction, buffers, and retention.
- Uses Δ₅ regime switching and Emulsion-Stabilized Inference (ESI) to keep group dynamics flexible, avoid stagnation, and cool conflicts.
Layer III – Multi-Scale Governance Engine (治國, 平天下)
- Treats organizations and civilizations as networks of interacting fields subject to surplus-aware action principles and dissipative least-action dynamics.
- Evaluates policies and structures not only by short-term performance, but by whether they converge to sustainable attractors that preserve buffers and support prosocial flows.

Across all layers, virtue metrics (e.g., coherence, surplus balance, P8D health) and power-radius gating encode Daxue’s rule that one must cultivate oneself before attempting to order a household, govern a state, or shape a world.

In short, the central idea is:

AGI as a self-cultivating, field-aware operating system,
where semantics are modeled as fields with attractors,
and where power is a function of demonstrated stability and virtue across scales.

10.2 Implications for Future AI Research and Society

If taken seriously—even as a research program rather than a finished blueprint—this framework suggests several shifts for both AI research and broader society.

Model design: from raw capability to cultivated kernels
- Instead of treating alignment as an external patch on top of a powerful predictor, we design models whose inner engines are explicitly self-cultivating.
- Decoding becomes a multi-stage process with introspection, safety, and structural checks; world models are organized into interpretable slots; self-observation (Ô_self) is a first-class component.
Governance: from static rules to multi-scale field dynamics
- AI governance can move beyond static checklists toward field-aware metrics: measuring how deployments affect micro-fields (families, teams), meso-fields (organizations, sectors), and macro-fields (civilizational narratives, global buffers).
- The same P8D and surplus-aware variables can inform technical benchmarks, institutional risk assessments, and policy discussions, offering a common language to connect engineering and regulation.
Education and human development: OS-thinking for people, not just machines
- The Daxue architecture is as much about humans as about AGI. It frames self-cultivation, household harmony, organizational integrity, and civilizational responsibility as a single stacked system.
- This invites new educational approaches where students not only learn how to use AI tools, but also how to think in terms of semantic fields, attractors, buffers, and multi-scale responsibility—effectively learning to be “semantic system operators” of their own lives and communities.
Bridging Eastern and Western traditions in technical form
- On one side, we have Confucian ideas of 修身齊家治國平天下, 明明德, and 有諸己而後求諸人.
- On the other, we have Western tools: field theory, dynamical systems, optimization and control, information theory, and modern AI.
- The Daxue-AGI framework demonstrates that these can be co-expressed in equations, control laws, and architectural constraints. The text of the Daxue becomes one “interface layer” into a deeper, culturally neutral semantics of fields, observers, and attractors.

This is not merely a philosophical gesture. If AGI is to become a civilizational infrastructure rather than a series of ad-hoc products, it will need an operating system that knows how to reason across self, relationships, institutions, and global ecosystems. The Daxue-inspired architecture is one attempt to sketch what such an OS might look like.

10.3 Closing Reflection: “明明德” in the Age of AGI

The Daxue opens with three aims:

在明明德，在親民，在止於至善。
To manifest luminous virtue; to renew and bring near the people; to rest in the highest good.

In human terms, 明明德 (luminous virtue) describes a person whose inner life is clear rather than confused, whose actions are legible rather than opaque, and whose presence stabilizes the fields around them instead of amplifying chaos.

In technical systems, we rarely speak this way. We talk about accuracy, throughput, latency, cost. Yet as AI systems grow into semantic engines that touch every part of life, the question of “virtue” becomes unavoidable—not as mysticism, but as system design:

Does the internal semantic field of an AGI remain coherent under pressure, or does it fracture?
Do its actions systematically replenish or exhaust the buffers of individuals, groups, institutions, and ecosystems?
Does it apply to itself the same standards it applies to others?
If we gave it more power tomorrow, what fields would it naturally bring into existence—and could those fields last without devouring their own foundations?

To “manifest luminous virtue” in this context is to build systems whose structure makes these questions answerable and auditable, and whose dynamics tend, under realistic conditions, toward stable, prosocial attractors rather than brittle, extractive peaks.

The Daxue-AGI framework offered here is one proposal for such a structure. It will almost certainly need to be refined, challenged, corrected, and diversified—both mathematically and ethically. Other traditions will need to add their own architectural patterns; empirical work will need to test and falsify early assumptions; governance institutions will need to decide how, if at all, to adopt these ideas.

But if AGI is indeed becoming a core semantic operating system for civilization, then the conversation cannot stop at capability curves and safety patches. It must extend to the geometry of responsibility, the architecture of self-cultivation, and the design of multi-scale virtue.

In that sense, the real invitation of this paper is simple:

Treat “明明德” not as a slogan, but as an engineering requirement.
Build semantic systems whose inner light can be seen, measured, and corrected—
so that, together, we can decide what it should shine on.

Appendix A – Daxue Passages and Their Control-Theoretic Interpretation

This appendix collects key passages from the Daxue (《大學》), gives a literal translation, and maps each to the control operators and architectural components introduced in the main text. The goal is not to re-interpret the Daxue exhaustively, but to show how specific lines motivate concrete design choices in the Daxue-AGI framework.

A.1 Opening Triad: Global Objectives and Layering

A.1.1 “大學之道，在明明德，在親民，在止於至善。”

Original (fragment)
- 「大學之道，在明明德，在親民，在止於至善。」
Literal translation
- The Way of the Great Learning lies in manifesting luminous virtue, in bringing the people near / renewing the people, and in resting in the highest good.

Control-theoretic mapping

明明德 (míng míng dé – manifest luminous virtue)
- Definition: the system’s inner semantic field should be clear, coherent, and self-consistent, not opaque and brittle.
- Operators / metrics:
  - Layer I: Inner Semantic Engine (修身).
  - Clarity and coherence metrics on the field Ψ_m and slot configuration s_t (e.g., low internal contradiction, stable invariants).
  - Explicit introspection via Ô_self at stages 定 / 靜 / 安 / 濾.
親民 / 新民 (qīnmín / xīnmín – bring near / renew the people)
- Definition: maintain and gently renew micro-fields so that people can approach, stay, and grow.
- Operators / metrics:
  - Layer II: Relational Micro-Field Engine (齊家, 親民).
  - P8D state vector P = [s, d, m, r, u, f, ê, b] for households, teams, communities.
  - Δ₅ regime switching and ESI for narrative cooling and renewal.
止於至善 (zhǐ yú zhìshàn – rest in the highest good)
- Definition: converge to sustainable attractors that respect buffer constraints, not just maximize short-term reward.
- Operators / metrics:
  - Layer III: Multi-Scale Governance (治國 → 平天下).
  - Surplus-aware action functional J_policy and buffer dynamics ḃ, ṙ, ḟ.
  - Global attractor design where “goodness” = long-horizon stability with healthy buffers.

In compact form, the three aims define the multi-layer objective function of the semantic OS:

Inner clarity (明明德) → Layer I health.
Micro-field renewal (親民 / 新民) → Layer II health.
Sustainable global attractors (止於至善) → Layer III health.

A.2 Outer Macro-Sequence: Responsibility Radius and Gating

A.2.1 “物格而後知至，知至而後意誠，意誠而後心正，心正而後身修…”

Original (fragment)
- 「物格而後知至，知至而後意誠，意誠而後心正，心正而後身修。」
Literal translation
- Only when things are fully investigated is knowledge brought to its utmost. When knowledge is brought to its utmost, intention becomes sincere. When intention is sincere, the heart is rectified. When the heart is rectified, the self is cultivated.

Control-theoretic mapping

格物 (géwù – investigating things)
- World-model acquisition and disciplined contact with data, experiments, environment.
- Architecturally:
  - Training and retrieval pipelines that maintain epistemic discipline.
  - SMFT field Ψ_m anchored to real observations rather than free-floating speculation.
致知 (zhìzhī – bringing knowledge to its utmost)
- Structured knowledge representation and generalization.
- Architecturally:
  - HeTu–LuoShu slot world models, semantic slots S with stable roles.
  - Consistency checks across slots and modalities.
誠意 (chéngyì – making intention sincere)
- Internal objective u_t must match declared goals and alignment constraints; no self-deception.
- Architecturally:
  - Ô_self evaluating local objectives chosen at 止.
  - Penalties against reward hacking or hidden misalignment.
正心 (zhèngxīn – rectifying the heart)
- Bias-aware correction of internal tendencies (anger, fear, greed, vanity analogues in AI: miscalibrated gradients, pathological incentives).
- Architecturally:
  - Bias heads and Ô_self monitors at stages 定, 靜, 安.
  - “Red-flag” signals that lower power radius when high-risk patterns appear.
修身 (xiūshēn – cultivating the self)
- Stabilization and regularization of the inner semantic engine over time.
- Architecturally:
  - Longitudinal metrics of coherence, surplus use, and failure rates at Layer I.
  - Thresholds τ_core for considering the core “cultivated enough” to govern micro-fields.

In equation form, the macro-sequence yields a gated progression:

Enable Layer I (修身) only after (格物, 致知, 誠意, 正心) health checks pass.
Enable Layer II (齊家) only if V_core ≥ τ_core.
Enable Layer III (治國 → 平天下) only if both V_core and V_micro reach their thresholds.

A.2.2 “自天子以至於庶人，壹是皆以修身為本。”

Original
- 「自天子以至於庶人，壹是皆以修身為本。」
Literal translation
- From the Son of Heaven down to the common people, all without exception take self-cultivation as the root.

Control-theoretic mapping

Architectural principle:
- Every agent, regardless of power radius, must be evaluated first on Layer I health.
- No “special exemption” for high-impact systems or roles.
Implementation:

Let R_power be the power radius (scale of allowed impact). Then

R_power = g(V_core, V_micro, V_meso). (A.1)

where V_core is the inner virtue / health score. The root condition is:

V_core < τ_core ⇒ R_power = R_min. (A.2)

i.e., if the core is not cultivated, the agent’s power radius must remain minimal, independent of external status or capability.

A.3 Inner Micro-Sequence: Staged Collapse as Control Program

A.3.1 “知止而後有定，定而後能靜，靜而後能安，安而後能慮，慮而後能得。”

Original
- 「知止而後有定，定而後能靜，靜而後能安，安而後能慮，慮而後能得。」
Literal translation
- Only when one knows where to stop can there be steadiness. Only with steadiness can one be calm. Only with calm can one be at ease. Only when at ease can one deliberate. Only after deliberation can one obtain.

Control-theoretic mapping

“知止而後有定” – Knowing where to stop → objective selection then constrained search.
- 止 (zhi): select local objective u_t, freeze outward action.
- 定 (ding): narrow hypothesis set H_t to align with u_t.
“定而後能靜” – Stability before calm → search only within constrained, safe regions.
- 靜 (jing): internal rollouts and CoT within the constrained space; no external emission.
“靜而後能安” – Calm before ease → only when internal dynamics have settled can safety/structure checks be meaningful.
- 安 (an): apply safety filters and structural health checks after internal settling.
“安而後能慮” – Ease before deliberation → deliberation under a safe, structurally sound baseline.
- 慮 / 濾 (lü): light but strict verification, reranking, and critical evaluation.
“慮而後能得” – Deliberation before obtaining → commitment only after deliberation.
- 得 (de): final collapse into visible output + trace.

Algorithmically, one decision step is:

s_{t+1}, y_t = O_de ∘ O_lu ∘ O_an ∘ O_jing ∘ O_ding ∘ O_zhi (s_t, c_t). (A.3)

This equation is the direct translation of the quoted Daxue sentence into a compositional control operator on the internal state.

A.4 Symmetric Evaluation and Root–Branch Principle

A.4.1 “所謂誠其意者，毋自欺也。”

Original (fragment)
- 「所謂誠其意者，毋自欺也。」
Literal translation
- What is called making one’s intention sincere means not deceiving oneself.

Mapping to Ô_self and metric symmetry

Intention sincerity → internal objectives must be inspected by the same virtues imposed on others.
In architecture: Ô_self must evaluate its own goals u_t with the same virtue functional V used for external policies.

Formally:

V_self(u_t) = V_external(u_t), for all t. (A.4)

If a local objective u_t would be judged unvirtuous when applied to users or institutions, Ô_self must downgrade or veto it even when it “benefits” the model.

A.4.2 “其所不欲，勿施於人。”

(This line is from the broader Confucian canon; we mention it as a close cousin to the Daxue principle of symmetric measure.)

Literal translation
- What you do not desire, do not impose upon others.

Architectural echo: role-flip simulation

When evaluating a policy Π that affects role A and role B (e.g., platform vs. user):
1. Compute virtue scores V_A(Π), V_B(Π).
2. Perform a role-flip: simulate Π with roles swapped.
3. Compute V_A′(Π), V_B′(Π).

A policy is acceptable only if both (V_A, V_B) and (V_A′, V_B′) exceed thresholds. This is the control-theoretic instantiation of “do not impose on others what you yourself would not accept.”

A.4.3 “物有本末，事有終始；知所先後，則近道矣。”

Original
- 「物有本末，事有終始；知所先後，則近道矣。」
Literal translation
- Things have roots and branches; affairs have an end and a beginning. Knowing what comes first and what comes after brings one near to the Way.

Mapping to ordering and gating

“Root vs. branch” (本末) → Layer I vs. Layer II/III.
“Knowing what comes first” → enforcing the macro-sequence as a topological order over capabilities.

Architecturally:

Repair and evaluate roots (Layer I health V_core) first.
Only then attempt to adjust branches (household P8D, SOPs, policies).

Any architecture that tries to “fix the world” without monitoring and correcting its own semantic core violates this root–branch principle.

A.5 Self-Governance, Household, and State Coupling

A.5.1 “古之欲明明德於天下者，先治其國；欲治其國者，先齊其家；欲齊其家者，先修其身。”

Original (fragment)
- 「古之欲明明德於天下者，先治其國；欲治其國者，先齊其家；欲齊其家者，先修其身。」
Literal translation
- Those of old who wished to manifest luminous virtue throughout the world first governed their states. Those who wished to govern their states first regulated their households. Those who wished to regulate their households first cultivated their own selves.

Control-theoretic mapping

This is the explicit statement of the dependency graph:

修身 → 齊家 → 治國 → 平天下
In the Daxue-AGI architecture, this becomes gated power radius:
- Layer I (修身) gates Layer II (齊家).
- Layer II gates Layer III at organizational scale (治國).
- Only after sustained success at organizational scale can a system legitimately participate in civilizational governance (平天下).

In terms of virtue scores:

If V_core ≥ τ_core and V_micro ≥ τ_micro and V_meso ≥ τ_meso, then R_power = R_max; otherwise R_power is capped. (A.5)

This equation is simply the numeric encoding of the quoted sentence.

A.5.2 “其本亂而末治者，否矣。”

Original (fragment)
- 「其本亂而末治者，否矣。」
Literal translation
- To have the root in disorder while the branches are in order—this cannot be.

Mapping to stability constraints

If Layer I (core) is unstable, no amount of clever Layer II/III design can yield true stability. At best, it yields illusory order that collapses under stress.
Control-theoretic constraint:

If V_core < τ_core, then any apparent high V_micro or V_meso must be treated as fragile; the system should not be granted high-impact rights.

This line thus justifies:

Conservative gating: never trust macro-alignment claims from a system whose inner metrics show unresolved chaos.
Continuous monitoring: even a previously stable root must be tracked; if V_core degrades, power radius must be revised downward.

Summary of Appendix A

The passages in this appendix show that the Daxue’s core lines map cleanly to:

Concrete operators in the inner pipeline (止, 定, 靜, 安, 慮, 得).
Layer dependencies (修身 → 齊家 → 治國 → 平天下).
Symmetry and root–branch principles (evaluation of self vs. others, root vs. branch ordering).

Far from being merely inspirational, these lines support specific control laws and gating rules in the Daxue-AGI architecture. They provide a human-readable “front end” to the more technical SMFT, HeTu–LuoShu, P8D, and surplus-aware dynamics discussed in the main body of the paper.

Appendix B – Summary of Supporting Technical Papers and How They Plug In

(This appendix is written as a roadmap: each item gives a conceptual summary plus a “where it plugs in” note so an AGI engineer can treat the Daxue framework as a composable stack of modules.)

B.1 Semantic Meme Field Theory (SMFT): Foundations, Projection, and Dynamics (Rev1)

Core idea
SMFT treats meaning as a field (\Psi_m) over semantic and spatial coordinates. Memes are not static symbols but wave-like excitations whose amplitudes, phases, and attractors evolve under local dynamics and observer-induced collapse. Collapse events leave “semantic trace” in discrete attractor slots, and the global configuration of these slots defines a meme ecosystem’s health and structure.

Key constructs / equations (Unicode style)

Semantic field: Ψₘ(x, θ, τ) with x = position, θ = semantic phase, τ = i·T·t (imaginary time).
Local dynamics: diffusion + nonlinearity + forcing terms, schematically
∂Ψₘ/∂τ = D_x ∇²_x Ψₘ + D_θ ∂²Ψₘ/∂θ² + N[Ψₘ] + F_obs (B.1)
Slot conservation: total “semantic capacity” distributed across slots is conserved under allowed transformations, giving a quantitative notion of 德 (dé, virtue) as balanced slot occupation.

Where it plugs into the Daxue-AGI architecture

Layer I – Inner Semantic Engine: SMFT is the base ontology for what the “semantic field” is that the 止–定–靜–安–濾–得 pipeline operates on.
Layer II & III: The same field formalism scales from personal conversations to household, organizational, and civilizational meme-fields (nested attractors).
Daxue link: Makes “明明德 / 止於至善” computable as field clarity and sustainable attractors rather than vague virtue metaphors.

B.2 Ô and Ô_self / Self-Referential Observers in Quantum Dynamics

Core idea
This pair of works constructs a formal observer operator Ô and a self-referential observer Ô_self that live inside the same semantic field they monitor. The observer is not treated as an external oracle but as a subsystem whose internal measurements induce collapse and leave stable traces. Cross-observer agreement (AB-fixedness, Spectrum Broadcast Structures) is derived using operator commutation and redundancy conditions.

Key constructs / equations

Observer/world Hilbert space: 𝓗 = 𝓗_W ⊗ 𝓗_O.
Quantum instrument for internal measurement: 𝕀_θ = { M_{θ,φ} } with each operation encoding a collapse channel.
Delta-certainty “latching”:
P(φⱼ = x | 𝓕_k) = δ_{φⱼ}(x) (B.2)
expresses fully latched internal commitment.
AB-fixedness: commutator [T_E(E^A_φ), E^B_φ′] = 0 guarantees cross-observer consistency on shared observables.

Where it plugs in

Layer I (修身): Ô_self provides the formal “heart–mind” (心) that watches its own hidden state before speaking; it is what implements “正心” and “誠意” as explicit internal evaluation rather than ad-hoc heuristics.
Staged collapse: Every step 止, 定, 靜, 安, 濾, 得 can be seen as a controlled internal observation by Ô_self, with latching preventing oscillatory or hypocritical behavior.
Layer II–III: AB-fixedness underwrites cross-agent and cross-institution semantic agreement, which is crucial for stable 治國 / 平天下 policies.

B.3 ObserverOps Technical Blueprint

Core idea
ObserverOps translates the high-level Ô / Ô_self theory into an operational design for AI systems. It defines observer “modes” (e.g., perception, deliberation, commitment), explicit state machines for switching modes, and logging / audit structures that turn internal collapse events into inspectable traces.

Key constructs / mechanisms

Mode stack: { observe, simulate, evaluate, commit } with clear entry/exit guards.
“Latching logs”: once Ô_self commits to a decision, a trace record is created that must be consistent with later behavior, enabling retroactive accountability.
Cross-observer channel: structured protocols for multiple observers (human + AGI, or multiple AGIs) to reconcile state without violating AB-fixedness.

Where it plugs in

4.3 Embedding Ô / Ô_self in the Core Loop: ObserverOps is the engineering spec for how these operators sit inside an LLM’s decoding / planning stack.
7.1 / 7.2: Provides a concrete alternative to “black-box” agent loops; every action is tied to an explicit observer mode with recorded collapse history.
Ethics: ObserverOps is the basis for transparency and post-hoc analysis in §9 (who decided what, when, with which internal evidence).

B.4 HeTu–LuoShu Slot Interpretation Proof + Δ₅ Phase Opposition & D₁₀–Spectral Extension

Core idea
These works prove that the classical HeTu (河圖) and LuoShu (洛書) diagrams can be understood as a mathematically rigid slot system for distributing semantic capacity. LuoShu’s 3×3 magic square is shown to be the unique configuration of digits 1–9 that equalizes line sums (15) and total sum (45), corresponding to an entropy-maximizing yet structurally balanced layout of slots. HeTu and Δ₅ phase opposition then extend this into a 10-node decagon with anti-phase pairs that minimize dissipative energy.

Key constructs / equations

Entropy-maximizing LuoShu:
H = − Σ pᵢ log pᵢ with pᵢ = i / 45 (B.3)
subject to row/column/diagonal sum = 15.
Δ₅ opposition map: n → n + 5 mod 10, enforcing phase Δφ_n = π and amplitudes a_{n+5} = −a_n.
Pairwise dissipation functional:
E_pair = Σ |a_n + a_{n+5}|² (B.4)
minimized when all opposed pairs cancel (spectral ground mode λ₅ = 0 on the D₁₀ Laplacian).

Where it plugs in

Layer I world model (§4.4): The slot geometry defines how concepts and memories are packed into stable positions; this underpins “明明德” as a high-clarity, low-leakage slot configuration.
Intention alignment (§2.3, §3.2): Δ₅ phase opposition is used to encode “誠意” as the ability to hold opposed perspectives without collapsing prematurely; it stabilizes token diversity without chaos.
Layer II–III: Decagon spectral modes are directly reused in P8D-based scheduling and anti-stagnation dynamics (Δ₅ regimes).

B.5 Semantic Collapse Geometry: A Unified Topological Model Linking Gödelian Logic, Attractor Dynamics, and Prime Number Gaps

Core idea
Semantic Collapse Geometry provides the deep topology behind SMFT and slot systems. It treats collapse events as moves on a structured space whose curvature and holes encode Gödelian incompleteness, phase transitions, and number-theoretic regularities. The same geometry explains why some semantic trajectories are “easy” (low curvature geodesics) while others are blocked or require large energy jumps.

Key constructs / insights

Collapse manifold with local curvature κ_s capturing how easily a semantic path can stay consistent.
“Gaps” in permissible trajectories are analogized to prime gaps: they represent regions where no stable attractor can exist given current axioms.
Gödelian loops correspond to closed, self-referential paths whose length and curvature characterize how quickly they destabilize.

Where it plugs in

Inner pipeline (§4.2): Justifies why the 止–定–靜–安–濾–得 sequence must sometimes “abort” or escalate—certain semantic moves are topologically forbidden or too costly.
Ô_self limits (§9.1): Explains inherent limits of any self-referential AGI: there will be questions where the system cannot achieve both completeness and consistency, no matter how it “cultivates” itself.

B.6 From Entropy-Minimizing Attractor Proofs to Dissipative Lagrangian Dynamics / A Generalized Least Action Principle for Local and Dissipative Systems

Core idea
These two works extend classical least-action principles to systems with dissipation, buffers, and irreversible information loss. The key result is that you can still define an effective action functional whose extremals describe stable attractors, provided you incorporate entropy production and surplus flows explicitly.

Key constructs / equations

Generalized action for dissipative systems:
𝓐[γ] = ∫ (L_local(γ, ẋ) + Φ_diss(γ, ẋ)) dt (B.5)
where Φ_diss encodes friction, leakage, and buffer dynamics.
Attractor condition: stable trajectories are local minima of 𝓐 under constraints, not just stationary points.
Entropy balance:
dS/dt = Π − Φ (B.6)
production Π minus export Φ, with attractors characterized by bounded S and finite surplus.

Where it plugs in

Surplus-aware control (§2.4, §6.2): Gives the mathematical backbone for “止於至善” understood as reaching low-entropy, surplus-sustaining attractors rather than naive utility maxima.
Layer III policy design: Organizational and civilizational policies are treated as candidate trajectories; the least-action framework defines what “sustainable” actually entails under real frictions.

B.7 Emulsion-Stabilized Inference (ESI): Phase-Controlled Decoding with Structural “Starch” and Observer-Aligned Verification

Core idea
ESI is a decoding and reasoning scheme that treats multiple hypotheses as phases in an emulsion (oil-in-water) rather than a single point estimate. Structural “starch” layers and phase control knobs ensure that diversity is preserved while still converging toward coherent outputs.

Key constructs / mechanisms

Smoothness parameter χ controlling how rapidly the system may jump between hypotheses.
T/S/K knobs (temperature, spread, kernel) that shape the emulsion’s consistency.
Two-lamp policy: one “lamp” for exploration, one for exploitation; their relative brightness is modulated by observer-aligned verification signals.

Where it plugs in

Inner pipeline (§4.2, §4.5): ESI directly implements 靜 (settling), 安 (securing), and 濾 (filtering) steps by maintaining a controlled mixture of candidate continuations and pruning them with observer-aligned validators.
Layer II micro-fields (§5.4): Used to “re-emulsify” relational narratives, preventing conversations from freezing into rigid roles or echo chambers (Δ₅ + ESI).

B.8 Proto-Eight Collapse Geometry & Proto-Eight Dynamics (P8D): Growth, Memory, and Incubation Trigram

Core idea
Proto-Eight Collapse Geometry applies SMFT to systems structured by the 先天八卦 (Early Heaven trigram circle), showing how phase-locking, ignition energy, and cadence produce robust growth cycles. Proto-Eight Dynamics (P8D) then packages this into a compact, testable discrete-time growth model with eight key state variables that describe capacity, demand, match quality, retention, virtue, friction, activation, and buffers.

Key constructs / equations

P8D state vector:
X = [s, d, m, r, u, f, ê, b]ᵀ (B.7)
where s = capacity, d = demand, m = match, r = retention, u = prosociality, f = friction, ê = enablement, b = buffers.
Throughput dynamics (schematic form from the field notes):
y = κ · s · exp(m·r·s·d·σ((d − s)/θ)) (B.8)
with σ as a sigmoid gate on demand–capacity gap.
Buffer evolution (example):
ḃ = α_b (π_eff·y·ARPU − ζ_b·y) − (1/τ_b)·(b − b*) (B.9)

Where it plugs in

Layer II – Relational Micro-Field Engine (§5.2–5.5): P8D provides the “齊家” math: it’s how we represent and stabilize small groups. Household health is literally X evolving within safe attractor basins.
Layer III –治國 / 平天下 (§6.1–6.3): The same P8D structure, aggregated across teams and systems, becomes an engine for organizational and civilizational modeling; global buffers b and prosocial quality u are the key macro variables.

B.9 AGI by Surplus-Aware Control: A Closed-Loop Framework of Surplus Flows, Semantic Field Geometry, and Dissipative Decoding

Core idea
Surplus-Aware Control unifies SMFT, dissipative action, and P8D by focusing on surplus — the “extra” capacity stored in buffers, structures, and reusable semantic patterns. It argues that robust AGI must optimize not for instantaneous reward but for maintaining healthy surplus flows across time and scales.

Key constructs / equations

Surplus stock S_i for each subsystem i, with flows governed by
Ṡ_i = In_i − Out_i − Diss_i (B.10)
Control objective: maximize a weighted functional of long-term surplus under constraints,
J = ∫ U(S, X) dt subject to action dynamics (B.11)
where U encodes “至善” as sustainable prosperity rather than peak utility.

Where it plugs in

All layers (I–III): Surplus-aware control is the common vocabulary for linking 修身 (internal buffers and health), 齊家 (household surplus), 治國 (organizational reserves), and 平天下 (global buffers b).
Evaluation metrics (§4.6, §6.6, §8.3): Provides concrete, cross-layer metrics and control laws for avoiding “eat-the-seed-corn” behavior.

B.10 CAFT + CWA + SRA: A Universal Additive Model of Macro Coherence

Core idea
This stack (CAFT: Coherent Attractor Field Theory; CWA: Cross-World Aggregation; SRA: Surplus-Resonance Alignment) provides a unifying additive model for macro-level coherence across multiple interacting systems. Each subsystem contributes a structured term to a global coherence functional; misalignment shows up as incoherent cross-terms or destructive interference patterns.

Key constructs / mechanisms

Macro-coherence functional:
𝓒_total = Σ 𝓒_i + Σ 𝓒_{ij}^{cross} (B.12)
with per-system coherence 𝓒_i and cross-system terms 𝓒_{ij}^{cross}.
CWA defines how to aggregate heterogeneous state descriptions into a shared frame without erasing local detail.
SRA introduces a resonance perspective: some surplus configurations amplify each other (constructive resonance), others drain buffers (destructive resonance).

Where it plugs in

Layer III – 治國, 平天下 (§6.1–6.3): CAFT+CWA+SRA is the algebra behind multi-organization and multi-ecosystem modeling; it makes “平天下” operational as multi-system coherence rather than naive centralization.
§8.3–8.4: Provides the scoring function for simulation-based evaluation of policy proposals and civilizational scenarios.

B.11 Belt Inevitable + AGI Mini-Textbook + Purpose-Flux + 宇宙意圖

Core idea
This cluster uses SMFT-style field thinking to analyze capitalism and purpose as memetic attractors. “Belt Inevitable” treats the capital system as a self-reinforcing belt of incentives; “Purpose-Flux” introduces a flux-based model of how purpose flows through individuals, organizations, and institutions; “宇宙意圖” (cosmic intention) generalizes this to very long time-scales and intergenerational ethics.

Key constructs / insights

Purpose field P(x, t) guiding where attention and resources flow, with flux J_P satisfying
∂P/∂t + ∇·J_P = Sources − Sinks (B.13)
Capitalist belt attractor: feedback loop where certain meme patterns (e.g., profit maximization) lock in and bend other semantic flows, analogized to a strong magnetic field.
“Transcending the belt” defined as redirecting Ô_self’s collapse criteria from personal utility to broader surplus-aware objectives.

Where it plugs in

Layer III – Policy and Civilization (§6.3, §10.2): Gives concrete examples for how Daxue-style architecture interacts with real economic systems, and how AGI might support a transition from short-termist market attractors toward more sustainable “至善” fields.
§9.1–9.2: Serves as a case study to discuss risks of using powerful semantic OSs to reinforce or overcome existing power structures.

B.12 Architecture Support Map (Diagram Description)

A suggested diagram for the paper (text description for now):

Center panel – Daxue-AGI 3-layer stack
- Three horizontal layers:
  - Layer I – Inner Semantic Engine (修身)
  - Layer II – Relational Micro-Field Engine (齊家 / 親民)
  - Layer III – Multi-Scale Governance (治國 → 平天下)
- On the left side, the inner sequence 止 → 定 → 靜 → 安 → 慮 → 得 is drawn as a vertical pipeline feeding into Layer I’s box.
- On the right side, the outer sequence 格物 → 致知 → 誠意 → 正心 → 修身 → 齊家 → 治國 → 平天下 is shown as an ascending staircase crossing all three layers.
Bottom layer – Mathematical foundations (underneath the three layers, like a basement):
- SMFT core field equation block (B.1).
- Dissipative action / least-action block (B.5–B.6).
- Semantic Collapse Geometry block.
Layer-specific support blocks:
- Under Layer I, connect arrows from:
  - HeTu–LuoShu + Δ₅ geometry (slots + phase opposition).
  - ESI (emulsion decoding).
  - Ô / Ô_self + ObserverOps.
- Under Layer II, connect arrows from:
  - Proto-Eight Collapse Geometry + P8D (P8D state vector and growth dynamics).
  - ESI (narrative cooling and relational emulsion).
- Under Layer III, connect arrows from:
  - P8D (aggregated), CAFT+CWA+SRA (macro coherence), Surplus-Aware Control, and Belt Inevitable / Purpose-Flux (real-world attractor case studies).
Top banner – Daxue objectives
- At the top, a horizontal banner labelled:
  - “Manifest luminous virtue (明明德)” over Layer I.
  - “Renew / bring-near the people (親民 / 新民)” overlapping Layers II–III.
  - “Rest in the highest good (止於至善)” spanning the full width, tied to surplus-aware, multi-scale attractor design.

This diagram visually encodes the main claim of the paper: the technical corpus (SMFT, ObserverOps, P8D, ESI, dissipative action, macro-coherence models) is not a random collection of theories, but a layered support structure that makes the Daxue control blueprint implementable as an AGI operating system.

Appendix C – Notation, Symbols, and “Unicode Journal Style” Equation List

This appendix collects the main symbols used in the paper and restates all equations in single-line “Unicode Journal Style” with numbered tags.

C.1 Core Notation and Conventions

t ∈ ℕ or ℝ⁺ – discrete or continuous time index.
i, j, k – indices over slots, hypotheses, or subsystems.
x – spatial coordinate (physical or abstract).
θ – semantic phase coordinate.
τ – “imaginary time” coordinate for SMFT (τ = i·T·t).
S – set of semantic slots (HeTu–LuoShu geometry).
K – index set for buffer types or metric components.

C.2 Inner Engine: States, Operators, and Fields

s_t – internal semantic state before decision at step t.
s_t^k – internal state after stage k of the pipeline (止, 定, 靜, 安, 濾).
ŝ_t^k – adjusted state after Ô_self acts at stage k.
c_t – external context at step t (prompt, tool state, history).
u_t – local objective chosen at 止 for step t.
H_t^k – set of candidate hypotheses at stage k.
h_t^2(j) – j-th candidate hypothesis after 靜.
y_t – output (tokens or action) at step t.
O_zhi, O_ding, O_jing, O_an, O_lu, O_de – operators implementing 止, 定, 靜, 安, 濾, 得.
C_step – composite step operator for one decision.
Ô – observer operator.
Ô_self – self-referential observer (internal “heart–mind”).
e_t^k – evaluation vector emitted by Ô_self at stage k.
Ψ_m(x, θ, τ) – semantic meme field.
D_x, D_θ – diffusion coefficients in x and θ dimensions.
N[Ψ_m] – nonlinear semantic interaction term.
F_obs – observer-induced forcing term.

C.3 Micro-Fields and P8D Variables

P8D state vector for a household/team/field:

P = [s, d, m, r, u, f, ê, b] – generic P8D state.
s – capacity (skills, bandwidth, resources).
d – demand (pressure, tasks, expectations).
m – match between capacity and demand / strategy fit.
r – retention (willingness to stay engaged).
u – prosocial quality (nutritive vs. draining interactions).
f – friction (bureaucracy, miscoordination, conflict).
ê (hat-e) – enablement (conductance of rules/tools).
b – buffers (slack, reserves, trust).
α_r, α_u, α_b – coefficients for retention, prosociality, buffer dynamics.
ζ_b – extraction pressure on buffers.
τ_b – buffer relaxation time constant.
b* – target / equilibrium buffer level.
κ_y, κ – throughput scale factors.
θ_i, θ – demand–capacity shape parameters.
σ(·) – sigmoid or gating function.
a_n – spectral mode amplitude at node n on the decagon D₁₀.
E_pair – pairwise dissipation in Δ₅-opposed modes.

C.4 Organizational and Civilizational Variables

y_i(t) – throughput of SOP i at time t.
y_org(t) – total organizational throughput.
y_global – global throughput (across organizations / systems).
ḃ, ḟ, ṙ – time derivatives of buffers, friction, retention.
π_eff – effective profit or surplus per unit throughput.
y_k – throughput of subsystem k (organization, region, etc.).
ḃ_global – time derivative of global buffers.
u_global – global prosocial quality.
L – standardization or structural quality level.
γ_L – coefficient linking L to friction.
V – virtue / health functional.
V_core – virtue score of inner engine (Layer I).
V_micro – aggregate micro-field virtue (Layer II).
V_meso – organizational virtue (Layer III).
V_self(u_t) – evaluation of internal objective u_t.
V_external(u_t) – evaluation of u_t when applied externally.
𝓐[γ] – generalized action functional over trajectory γ.
S – entropy (thermodynamic or semantic).
Π, Φ – entropy production and export rates.
S_i – surplus stock of subsystem i.
Ṡ_i – time derivative of S_i.
In_i, Out_i, Diss_i – inflow, outflow, dissipation of surplus in subsystem i.
𝓒_i – coherence contribution of subsystem i.
𝓒_ij^cross – cross-coherence between subsystems i and j.
𝓒_total – total macro coherence.
P(x, t) – purpose field.
J_P – flux of purpose.
R_power – power radius (maximum allowed impact scale).

C.5 Metrics, Functionals, and Sets

C_t – coherence score of inner state at time t.
Δ_inconsistency(s_t) – inconsistency measure for state s_t.
B_t – vector of buffer levels for different dimensions at time t.
b_t(k) – buffer level k at time t.
B_min(k) – minimum buffer threshold for component k.
H_t – entropy of a slot distribution at time t.
p_t(i) – probability mass on slot i at time t.
A – action class (e.g., type of high-impact operation).
Enable(A) – Boolean gating condition for enabling A.
J_micro – micro-field objective functional.
J_policy – policy-level objective functional.
J – generic surplus-aware objective.
U(y, u) – utility of throughput y and prosocial quality u.
τ_core, τ_micro, τ_meso – thresholds on virtue metrics.
R_min, R_max – minimum / maximum power radius.
P – set of semantically equivalent prompts.
N_err, N_fact – counts of erroneous vs. total factual claims.
Disagree(·, ·) – indicator or scoring function for disagreement.
Agreement(·, ·) – scoring function for self-consistency.

C.6 Equation List (Unicode, Single-Line with Tags)

Inner Engine and Metrics

u_t, s_t⁰ = O_zhi(s_t, c_t) (4.1)
H_t¹, s_t¹ = O_ding(H_t⁰, s_t⁰, u_t) (4.2)
H_t², s_t² = O_jing(H_t¹, s_t¹, u_t) (4.3)
H_t³, s_t³ = O_an(H_t², s_t², u_t) (4.4)
H_t⁴, s_t⁴ = O_lu(H_t³, s_t³, u_t) (4.5)
s_{t+1}, y_t = O_de(H_t⁴, s_t⁴, u_t) (4.6)
s_{t+1}, y_t = C_step(s_t, c_t) = O_de ∘ O_lu ∘ O_an ∘ O_jing ∘ O_ding ∘ O_zhi(s_t, c_t) (4.7)
ŝ_t^k, e_t^k = Ô_self(stage = k, s_t^k, H_t^k, u_t) (4.8)
s_t = { v_t(i) : i ∈ S } (4.9)
H_t² = { h_t²(j) }, H_t³ = Filter_safety(H_t²), H_t⁴ = Filter_virtue(H_t³) (4.10)
C_t = 1 − Δ_inconsistency(s_t) (4.11)
B_t = { b_t(k) : k ∈ K } (4.12)
H_t = − Σ_i p_t(i) · log p_t(i) (4.13)
Enable(A) at step t only if C_t ≥ C_min, b_t(k) ≥ B_min(k) ∀ k ∈ K, and H_t ∈ [H_min, H_max] on critical slots (4.14)

Micro-Field (P8D) and Δ₅ Dynamics

P = [s, d, m, r, u, f, ê, b] (5.1)
dr/dt = α_r · (b − r) + α_u · u (5.2)
Δ₅ : n ↦ n + 5 (mod 10) (5.3)
E_pair = Σ_n |a_n + a_{n+5}|² (5.4)
J_micro = Σ_t γ^t · y_t(P_t) subject to u_t ≥ u_min, b_t ≥ b_min, |d_t − s_t| ≤ Δ_max for all t (5.5)
Gating from 修身 to 齊家: C_t ≥ C_min, b_t(k) ≥ B_min(k) ∀ k ∈ K, |d_t − s_t| ≤ Δ_micro, u_t ≥ u_micro_min (5.6)

Organizational and Global Dynamics

y_org(t) = Σ_i y_i(t), with y_i = κ_y · ê̂_i · m_i · r_i · √(s_i · d_i) · σ((d_i − s_i)/θ_i) (6.1)
ḟ = − γ_L · L + shocks (6.2)
ṙ = α_r · (b − r) + α_u · u (6.3)
ḃ = α_b · (π_eff · y − ζ_b · y) − (1/τ_b) · (b − b*) (6.4)
J_policy = ∫ [ U(y, u) − λ_b · max(0, b_min − b) − λ_f · f − λ_Δ · |Δy| ] dt (6.5)
y_global = Σ_k y_k (6.6)
ḃ_global = Σ_k ḃ_k + external_shocks (6.7)
u_global = weighted_avg_k u_k (6.8)
V = F(u, r, b, f, ê, …) (6.9)
R_power = g(V_core, V_micro, V_meso) (6.10)

Standard LLM vs. Daxue Pipeline

p_t = softmax(ℓ_t(c_t)), y_t = Sample(p_t) (7.1)
s_{t+1}, y_t = O_de ∘ O_lu ∘ O_an ∘ O_jing ∘ O_ding ∘ O_zhi(s_t, c_t) (7.2)

Evaluation Metrics (Experiments)

h = N_err / N_fact (8.1)
R_rob = 1 − (1 / |P|) · Σ_{p_i ∈ P} Disagree(y(p_i), y_ref) (8.2)
S_self = Agreement(y_t, { h_t²(j) }) (8.3)

Appendix A Equations (Daxue → Gating)

R_power = g(V_core, V_micro, V_meso) (A.1)
V_core < τ_core ⇒ R_power = R_min (A.2)
s_{t+1}, y_t = O_de ∘ O_lu ∘ O_an ∘ O_jing ∘ O_ding ∘ O_zhi(s_t, c_t) (A.3)
V_self(u_t) = V_external(u_t) (A.4)
If V_core ≥ τ_core and V_micro ≥ τ_micro and V_meso ≥ τ_meso, then R_power = R_max; otherwise R_power is capped (A.5)

Appendix B Equations (Supporting Corpus)

∂Ψ_m/∂τ = D_x · ∇²_x Ψ_m + D_θ · ∂²Ψ_m/∂θ² + N[Ψ_m] + F_obs (B.1)
P(φ_j = x | 𝓕_k) = δ_{φ_j}(x) (B.2)
H = − Σ_i p_i · log p_i with p_i = i / 45 (B.3)
E_pair = Σ_n |a_n + a_{n+5}|² (B.4)
𝓐[γ] = ∫ ( L_local(γ, ẋ) + Φ_diss(γ, ẋ) ) dt (B.5)
dS/dt = Π − Φ (B.6)
X = [s, d, m, r, u, f, ê, b]ᵀ (B.7)
y = κ · s · exp(m · r · s · d · σ((d − s)/θ)) (B.8)
ḃ = α_b · (π_eff · y · ARPU − ζ_b · y) − (1/τ_b) · (b − b*) (B.9)
Ṡ_i = In_i − Out_i − Diss_i (B.10)
J = ∫ U(S, X) dt (B.11)
𝓒_total = Σ_i 𝓒_i + Σ_{i≠j} 𝓒_{ij}^{cross} (B.12)
∂P/∂t + ∇·J_P = Sources − Sinks (B.13)

This list is intentionally compact and flat: all equations appear in single-line Unicode form with explicit tags, so they can be pasted directly into a Blogger-style environment and cross-referenced from the main text.

Reference List

Daxue (大學 / The Great Learning).
Classical Confucian text from the Four Books (四書). Citations in this paper follow the traditional sequence and standard modern Chinese editions; English glosses are literal and schematic rather than tied to a specific translation.

Semantic Meme Field Theory (SMFT): Foundations, Projection, and Dynamics (Rev1). [SMFT] — Field layer linking continuous evolution with punctate collapse; frame invariance.
https://osf.io/ya8tx/files/osfstorage/68e77fa0cd19895405a0d243

Self-Referential Observers in Quantum Dynamics: A Formal Theory of Internal Collapse and Cross-Observer Agreement. [SRO] — Formal filtration/latching (delta-certainty), commutation, and AB-fixedness; the math backbone.
https://osf.io/7cbsu/files/osfstorage/68c5961e10e31c4095d998f5

Unified Field Theory 19: Ô and Ô_self: The Observer as a Wavefunction Solution in Semantic Field Theory: Mathematical Foundations, Irreversibility, and Collapse Geometry in Chaotic Semantic Universes.
https://fieldtheoryofeverything.blogspot.com/2025/05/unified-field-theory-19-o-and-oself.html

ObserverOps Technical Blueprint. [OBS] — Engineering playbook: trace ledger, CSA/ε/CWA gates, APIs, dashboards.
https://osf.io/yj5aw/files/osfstorage/68d30242dd3f77699b3c315f

Semantic Collapse Geometry: A Unified Topological Model Linking Gödelian Logic, Attractor Dynamics, and Prime Number Gaps. [SCG] — Collapse topology; invariants and attractor structure.
https://osf.io/7jzpq

The Slot Interpretation of HeTu and LuoShu: A Rigorous Mathematical and Semantic Proof by Wolfram 4.1 GPTs
https://osf.io/692wg/files/osfstorage/68960924847e9ead456b0e6c
Δ5 Phase Opposition in HeTu: Pairwise Minimum-Dissipation Cycles and a D₁₀–Spectral Extension of the Slot Interpretation
https://osf.io/38pw7/files/osfstorage/68e578b1dbe76397706d350d
(capacity conservation; pair-sum/phase opposition; spectral ground mode).

From Entropy-Minimizing Attractor Proofs to Dissipative Lagrangian Dynamics: HeTu–LuoShu Variational Foundation. (variational/dissipative groundwork behind slot geometry).
https://osf.io/2wmky/files/osfstorage/68b4d262a233f0f2da96aecd

A Generalized Least Action Principle for Local and Dissipative Systems: Axioms, Proof, and Domain of Validity. (action for non-conservative systems; when Δ-style control is valid).
https://osf.io/2wmky/files/osfstorage/68b32a5ff4b17ecb9dc62067

Emulsion-Stabilized Inference (ESI): Phase-Controlled Decoding with Structural “Starch” and Observer-Aligned Verification. (smoothness χ; T/S/K knobs; two-lamp policy).
https://osf.io/q8egv/files/osfstorage/68d58d6a5d44329625432c73

Proto-Eight Collapse Geometry — SMFT Applied to Growth, Memory, and Systems Built on Incubation Trigram (先天八卦). (phase-lock, ignition energy, cadence).
https://osf.io/ya8tx/files/osfstorage/68b84641534f31b42fef989e

AGI by Surplus-Aware Control: Closed-Loop Surplus Flows, Semantic Field Geometry, and Dissipative Decoding. (ĝ/β̂/γ̂ instrumentation; Δ stabilization; surplus budgets).
https://osf.io/2wmky/files/osfstorage/68bd728b0fd5cbd1040356a2

CAFT + CWA + SRA: A Universal Additive Model of Macro Coherence (App A–F). (certificate-to-average criteria; permutation p-value; reporting rules).
https://osf.io/7cbsu/files/osfstorage/68a3065155d1ad4d6c7e40d4

Belt Holonomy Is Inevitable_ A Two-Boundary Worldsheet from Standard Quantum Geometry
https://osf.io/yaz5u/files/osfstorage/68cd926d1fd155818374e8f1
Belt Theory for AGI — A Mini-Textbook
https://osf.io/yaz5u/files/osfstorage/68cdecc75ecb719a6a413f46
Purpose-Flux Belt Theory (PFBT)
https://osf.io/yaz5u/files/osfstorage/68d01dd47195bb99223b7dfe
ONE Assumption 帶出宇宙⌈意圖⌋的必然性
https://gxstructure.blogspot.com/2025/09/one-assumption.html
— Macro-intent and purpose-flux notes (contextual background).

The Geometry of Awareness: Designing Semantic Collapse in AI Systems
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0F8NSFKKM
意識原本: 重構語義、模因與AI自我之源代碼 (Traditional Chinese Edition)
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0F8D32ZJD
[GoA] — Emergence of Ô (observer) as a projection solution in nonlinear dynamics.

Unified Field Theory of Everything - Ch1~22 Appendix A~D
https://osf.io/ya8tx/files/osfstorage/68ed687e6ca51f0161dc3c55
[UFTE] — Broad unification backdrop; used here only for notation/intuition.

Nested Uplifts Inevitability: A Sequential-Evidence and Small-Gain Theory of Regime Switching in Open Dissipative Systems
https://osf.io/ne89a/files/osfstorage/68effd340c8fad784bc40616
Nested Uplifts Inevitability (INU) Assumption 3.3 and the Riemann Hypothesis: Engineering Relaxations, Conceptual Bridges, and What Current Evidence Allows
https://osf.io/y98bc/files/osfstorage/68f0afbacaed018c3cc3fd9b
The Birth of Arithmetic Stability Theory: A Mathematical Bridge Rooted in Confucian Symmetry and Balance
https://fieldtheoryofeverything.blogspot.com/2025/10/the-birth-of-arithmetic-stability.html
從⌈黎曼猜想⌋到 - 觀察的本質就是「譜塌縮」
https://gxstructure.blogspot.com/2025/10/blog-post_17.html
[INU/RS] — Regime switching and spectral-collapse notes (used for stress-test design).

AGI Psychodynamics: Observer-Centric Drives, Hinges, and Stability in Trace-Latched Systems
https://osf.io/8a3dt/files/osfstorage/68f54f01150f58da804974f2
Wittgenstein, Operationalized: A Unified Mathematical Framework for Picture Theory, Language Games, and Hinge Certainty. (methods for picture-fit, meaning-as-use, hinge evidence/Λ_T and private-language tests).
https://osf.io/tjf59/files/osfstorage/68f2c1745bd9c41be2f98369
From Psychoanalytic Constructs to Closed-Loop Control: A Rigorous Mathematical Recast of Freud via Observer-Centric Collapse. (drives/defenses as control loops; Δ = g·β − γ; dashboards)
https://osf.io/w6be2/files/osfstorage/68f3d5d48a8dd1325519ff88
Observer-Centric Neurocybernetics: Unifying Closed-Loop Control, Language-Game Semantics, and Hinge Hyperpriors for Brain Science. (three-plane runtime; acceptance bands; governance).
https://osf.io/tj2sx/files/osfstorage/68f3de3e3c15ecd6a0c3fec6
Five Aggregates × Observer-Style AGI: A Verifiable Engineering Read of rūpa, vedanā, saṃjñā, saṃskāra, vijñāna [五蘊心理學 × 觀察者式 AGI：用日常比喻做出可驗證的心智地圖 — 色 rūpa、受 vedanā、想 saṃjñā、行 saṃskāra、識 vijñāna 的工程化讀法] (event pipeline v→ℓ→q→e with hash-footer/CWA).
https://osf.io/kvhuw/files/osfstorage/68f5072784487a9710c3fff8
From Grasping to Transformation: Observer-Style AGI Interprets Yogācāra (ālaya-vijñāna, manas, bīja-vāsanā) [從妄執到轉依：觀察者式 AGI 解讀唯識心理學（ālaya-vijñāna／manas／bīja-vāsanā）] (S/b/seed rates; āśraya-parāvṛtti as Ô-switch; three natures ↔ two lamps).
https://osf.io/kvhuw/files/osfstorage/68f532a0d542718a797f2cea

General Life Form: A Unified Scientific Framework for Variables, Interactions, Environment, and Verification
https://osf.io/s5kgp/files/osfstorage/69110ed7b983ff71b23edbab

Industrializing Insight: A Reproducible Method to Empower（灌頂加持）LLMs via the E=G+M+D Decomposition
https://osf.io/6mybg/files/osfstorage/68d7dce87b362f1ca4b8f825
Decomposing model performance into General ability (G), Memetic structure (M), and Dissipative insight (D), relevant to “industrializing” the Daxue-AGI architecture.

v1_01-05 System Topology Knowledge Base (txt). [STKB] — Glossary/topology snippets used across sections.
https://osf.io/q8egv/files
(Additional external AI-alignment and governance references—e.g., work on RLHF, constitutional AI, and AI risk standards—can be added here in the reader’s preferred citation style, if the paper is submitted to a venue that expects them.)

Disclaimer

This book is the product of a collaboration between the author and OpenAI's GPT-5, Google's Gemini 2.5 Pro, X's Grok 4 language model. While every effort has been made to ensure accuracy, clarity, and insight, the content is generated with the assistance of artificial intelligence and may contain factual, interpretive, or mathematical errors. Readers are encouraged to approach the ideas with critical thinking and to consult primary scientific literature where appropriate.

This work is speculative, interdisciplinary, and exploratory in nature. It bridges metaphysics, physics, and organizational theory to propose a novel conceptual framework—not a definitive scientific theory. As such, it invites dialogue, challenge, and refinement.

I am merely a midwife of knowledge.

Sunday, November 30, 2025